Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, a distinguished figure within the Islamabad High Court (IHC), has recently initiated steps for contempt proceedings in response to a complaint lodged against him, citing alleged defamation on various social media platforms.
This development unfolds just a day following a similar move by Justice Babar Sattar from the IHC, who also petitioned for contempt proceedings amidst a widespread social media campaign targetting both him and his family.
Justice Kayani, renowned as one of the senior-most judges within the IHC hierarchy after the chief justice, voiced his distress over what he termed a “scandalous” social media campaign orchestrated against him.
Sources close to the matter revealed that Justice Kayani referenced a complaint lodged against him with the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), alongside a vlog and a televised programme where the complainant, Advocate Mohammad Waqas Malik, openly criticised the judge.
However, the progression of these complaints by the two judges has encountered delays as the necessary bench to address the matter has yet to be constituted.
This delay stems from the unavailability of IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq, who, as the authority to assign such pleas before a bench, was engaged in chairing a pivotal meeting of the Justice Committee of the federal capital.
The Justice Committee, under the leadership of CJ Farooq, convened on Tuesday with key stakeholders including district and sessions judges, the Law and Justice Secretary, the Islamabad Chief Commissioner, the Inspector General, and other officials, to deliberate on matters pertaining to the administration, operation, and security challenges within the federal capital.
Turning focus to the complaint against Justice Kayani, Advocate Malik’s grievance was filed shortly after Justice Kayani and five other IHC judges penned a letter to the SJC, denouncing the purported interference of intelligence agencies in judicial affairs.
Allegations levelled by Mr. Malik, a former General Secretary of the Islamabad High Court Bar Association, implicated the judge in a deliberate act of “waging a war” against security forces by influencing other high court judges.
Furthermore, the complaint highlighted concerns regarding the judge’s integrity and conduct, alluding to a previous complaint lodged against Justice Kayani in October 2023. This complaint accused the judge of favouritism towards lawyers with whom he shared past professional affiliations.
Advocate Malik’s complaint echoed broader concerns about the role of intelligence agencies in monitoring judicial conduct, emphasising the need to safeguard against potential misconduct by judges.
In light of these developments, the complaint sought redress under Article 209 of the Constitution, aiming to address what it perceives as a maligning of the judiciary’s integrity and independence.
