Daily Times

As has been seen in the recent past, the members of the legal fraternity have become victims of tragic incidents including terrorism, target killings, as well as grave injustices of dictatorial regimes. But there is one tragedy that has victimised them since the very inception of their profession — their sense of superiority, this preconceived notion that they are above others in terms of calculating their rights and interests, and no one could hamper the same.

These days there is an increase in the number of strikes in the subordinate courts in Lahore, and that too under the guided umbrella of the Punjab Bar Council, the entity whose primary function is to regularise, enroll and issue licences for practice to lawyers up to the level of the provincial High Court. It has almost been a week that the abandoned notice board standing at the entrance of the Aiwan-e-Adal has carried the announcements of call for strike by lawyers, almost every other day. Be that as it may, let us first assert that the facts are what they are, but the law has always remained open to interpretations.

For those who are not directly related to the legal fraternity or are somehow not following the news about this clash leading to everyday strikes it is important to take into consideration a brief account of the undisputed facts. As reported, the licence of the incumbent vice president of the Lahore Bar Association was suspended by the supervisory committee of the honourable Lahore High Court after issuing him a show cause notice for (allegedly?) misbehaving with an Additional District and Session Judge in Lahore. Subsequently, for further necessary action, the matter was referred to the Punjab Bar Council, as it is the authority with exclusive jurisdiction to try the matters of misconduct by lawyers.

However, vide its order dated 08.10.2016, the Punjab Bar Council suspended the order of the supervisory committee of the honourable Lahore High Court, and reinstated the licence of the said individual, declaring the committee’s decision “to be void and without lawful authority” on account of “transgression and interference into the prudent working of the Statutory Body [the Punjab Bar Council].” In the aftermath of this order by the Punjab Bar Council, the political tycoons in the legal fraternity started a commotion upon the very constitution of the supervisory committee of the honourable Lahore High Court, Lahore.

At the very outset it is important to understand the constitution of the supervisory committee and the non-exclusive powers of the honourable Lahore High Court in this regard. There is no cavil to the fact that the Punjab Bar Council has the exclusive jurisdiction to ultimately deal with such matters. However, it is pertinent to mention that Article 202 of the Constitution of Pakistan specifically empowers any of the provincial High Courts in the way that “subject to the Constitution and law, a High Court may make rules regulating the practice and procedure of the Court or of any court subordinate to it.” In Volume 5, Chapter 6, Part A (1) of the Rules and Orders of the Lahore High Court, through the powers envisioned to the High Court under Article 202 of the Constitution, the High Court empowers itself to “take such disciplinary action, including suspension and removal from practice of the Court” against an advocate who has been guilty of “misconduct or conduct unbecoming an Advocate.”

Moreover, under Section 54(2) of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Act, 1973 (the Act), the clause that is specifically applicable in the present case, the High Court, upon a complaint from the subordinate court, may make an order for suspension of a lawyer’s licence for grave professional misconduct, and refer the complaint to relevant provincial bar council for taking appropriate action in terms of the said provision.

Factually, through the notification No. 74/RHC/C-I, dated 28.06.2016, his lordship Mr Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, as newly appointed Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court, constituted a supervisory committee of six judges (including himself) as members of the said committee to exercise powers under the Act. As such, under the scheme of law, the honourable High Court is empowered to take actions under the constitution, the law and the rules made thereunder. It further needs to be understood that this notification has been issued strictly in accordance with Article 202 read with the Act, and the Lahore High Court Orders and Rules. From the consolidated reading of the abovementioned provisions of laws, it becomes evidently clear that the suspension of the licence by the supervisory committee was in keeping with the provisions of the Constitution, the Act and Rules.

The outcome of this fight is noteworthy as the relationship between the bar and the bench is an eternal one, as compared to temporary political positions and establishment of committees. As a consequence of this entire episode, the integrity of ‘black coats’ and the respect of ‘black robes’ is at stake, coupled with the misery for public at large and, more precisely, for litigants who are bearing the brunt of the strikes. Therefore, instead of being egotistic, such disputes are required to be resolved with mutual understanding and compromise rather than by observing strikes and challenging the respective authorities of the bar and the bench.

The writer is a Lahore-based lawyer. He can be reached at javedahaseeb@gmail.com and on Twitter @haseebajaved