PTI’s Tiger Force under criticism for inefficiency

Over three months have passed since the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf government announced Corona Relief Tiger Force (CRTF) to help government cope with the COVID-19 outbreak and other social challenges caused by the contagion. However, a huge difference between the federal government’s claims and the actual performance of the CRTF has made the Tiger Force controversial.

The Prime Minister Imran Khan had formally announced the formation of CRTF on March 31 in such circumstances when the country was passing through complete lockdown. According to the statements of PM, the CRTF was formed to help the government fight Covid-19 across the country.

Right after the formation of CRTF, the Chief of the Tiger Force and Special Assistant to PM on Youth Affairs Usman Dar announced the registration of the CRTF until April 10.

Meanwhile, by the mid of April, while giving statistics, Mr Dar said that around one million people had registered themselves for the CRTF that included doctors, engineers, lawyers, retired army personnel and others. Giving the break-up, he said more than 300,000 students, 133,000 social workers, 50,000 doctors, 40,000 teachers and 17,000 health workers had registered themselves to render their volunteer services for the country in the wake of pandemic.

According to the data available on different websites, the highest number i.e 619,000 volunteers have registered themselves as CRTF members in Punjab, followed by over 154,000 in Sindh, 135,000 in KP, nearly 14,000 in Balochistan, 13,800 in Islamabad, 11,300 in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and 5,800 in Gilgit-Baltistan.

However, after the formation of the Tiger Force many questions were raised about the specific responsibilities of the CRTF, as apparently it was lacking any particular roadmap and formal strategy, which has created doubts about the status of the Tiger Force.

It must be noted that the Tiger Force was formed by the government and responsibilities assigned to them included provision of food to the needy people, helping the security forces and district administrations, assist health experts in arranging the funeral prayers and burials of the Covid-19 victims and convincing the masses to adopt the SOPs while visiting the mosques.

However, according to the short survey conducted by Voice of KP, very few activities of the Tiger Force were witnessed in any of the mosques and markets across the country, particularly in KP province. Moreover, serving the quarantine centres across the country and launching awareness campaigns regarding the threat of Covid19 were among the important duties assigned to the Tiger Force by PM himself; however, survey conducted by Voice of KP in different quarantine centres in Mardan, Swat, and Swabi found that none of the Tiger Force member were serving the quarantine centres and awareness campaigns were yet to be conducted by the force.

While talking to the Voice of KP, a member of Tiger Force hailing from Mardan without disclosing his name stated that they were ready for serving the nation without any personal interests, but response of the government and non-serious attitude of the senior management of the CRTF proved that joining the force was mere wastage of time.
He stated that there were thousands of members registered in the CRTF, but very few of them were performing their duties in different places and the reason behind the lack of interest was absence of any proper road map and inconsistency in policies and decisions of the government regarding the Tiger Force.

Besides the criticism on CRTF within the party, many other political parties and journalistic quarters have also greatly criticized the PTI Tiger Force and have termed it a political gimmick and a strategy of PTI to secure its vote among the youths of the country.

Meanwhile, many senior journalists including Saleem Safi has suggested that the ruling PTI should have used existing and immediate government and non-government networks in relief efforts while observing implementation of SOPs rather than announcing a parallel force like the CRTF.

Many other political experts believe that the government should have restored the local governments in the provinces instead of forming the Tiger Force as it would take a very long time to train the force and equip them with necessary skills about how to deal with such tough situations.

Justice Faez Isa case – Is judges remarks fair?

Judiciary in Pakistan have remained frequently under scanner due to various controversial decisions and scandals. Power and money are said to be used to bend the law. Despondency of our system is, that laws are either not implemented or implemented selectively.

The problem once again surfaced when a presidential reference under article 209 was filed against Supreme Court judge Qazi Faez Isa accusing him of concealing properties in UK allegedly held in the name of his spouse and children. On the basis of reference, SJC (supreme judicial council) started proceedings under chairmanship of former chief justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa. As per the reference, Justice Isa purchased three properties in London on lease but didn’t disclose the same in his financial statement. Justice Isa refuted the allegation and maintains that he cannot be made accountable for the assets of his children. Justice Isa has stated that allegations against him are baseless as his children are not minors nor have they been so, for quite a while and neither his spouse nor his children are his dependents. Moreover, he mentioned that Section 116 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001 is not a penal provision.”

However, as per opinion of legal experts, it was essential for the judge to disclose such assets as there was a close relationship between the judge and his spouse. Moreover, a senior lawyer on condition of anonymity said that justice Isa has intentionally politicize the case due to his legal position and to attract support from leftist in order to pressurize the supreme judicial council.

Resultantly, opposition and legal fraternity have opposed the reference. Asma Jahangir group and Hamid khan group has opposed government complaint against Isa. PBC (Pakistan Bar council) held protest against the reference and legal powers opposed the reference declaring it an attack on independent judges.

In the latest hearing, remarks of supreme judicial council bench judges have put questions over the court process. Moreover, judges remarks on how government has been able to acquire the details of justice Faez Isa property has also irk the public and legal fraternity.

The focus of supreme judicial council should have been on main accusation as to why the judge conceal his close family property rather than questioning the legality of ARU (Asset Recovery Unit). Cases such as Justice Faez Isa are a litmus test for the impartiality and fairness of the courts. The honorable supreme judicial council judges should refrain from any such remarks and should focus on deciding the case on merit. Decision and conduct of such cases are of great importance as it will shape public opinion about the fairness of Pakistan justice system. In reality, the supremacy of the constitution and its implementation on basis of unbiasedness is the only way for the justice system to achieve its apex.

Flaws in the selection system of judges

There have been reservations and objections over the appointment of high courts’ judges and the mechanism of their elevation to Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Legal fraternity has always voiced criticism against the practice and procedure for the nomination of high court judges, reason being the absence of open and clear criteria for selection of judges and their elevation to higher judiciary.

The court system of Pakistan is bifurcated into two tiers, namely superior and subordinate judiciary. Supreme Court of Pakistan and provincial high courts form the superior judiciary while subordinate or lower judiciary comprises of civil judges, judicial magistrates, additional district and sessions judges.

As per the constitutional quota distribution, 40 percent of the High Court judges are to be selected/elevated from lower courts, while 60 percent seats are senior lawyers fulfilling constitutional requirements.

There are issues regarding appointments as very little number of the lower judiciary members are elevated to high courts; on the other hand, selection of lawyers are said to be dominantly based on personal or political favoritism. A senior advocate of Peshawar High Court on condition of anonymity revealed that the judicial commission members including judges and the bar council president often select members of their own chambers, apprentices or friends. They could do it easily as they constitute majority of the judicial commission. He said that the incumbent governments influence the selection of judges, that’s why we have so many judges in our courts who were in somewhat association with JUI, ANP, PPP and PTI when these parties had governments in the province. He cited example of the recent appointments of the PHC judges, saying senior lawyer Tariq Afridi’s name was dropped after the parliamentary committee objected to his name. It is said that Tariq Afridi, while he was vice chairperson of the Bar Council, had demanded forensic audit of the Bar Council, that is why the lawyers’ wings of ANP and PTI had turned against him.

It is an open secret that lawyers develop personal association with different political parties during their practice and either maintain those relations or remain under specific political parties influence when they become judges. There are also number of examples where activists/members of the lawyers’ wings of political parties become judges.

Senior Advocate High Court Babar Khan Yousafzai said that after the 18th Amendment, criteria for the selection of high court judges is changed; now the powers rest with Judicial Commission instead of the President. He said that the number of judges exceeds that of executives in Judicial Commission. Once the judicial commission finalizes the names, there is very little or no role of the parliamentary committee or the President to reverse, change or do any investigations further. Babar Khan Yousafzai disagreed with introduction of test or competitive examination for the selection of High Court Judges, saying it was a constitutional position. However, he said that there was no harm if certain criteria was introduced for selection of Judges just like there is a criteria of mandatory advocating of 100 cases at High Court for obtaining a lawyer license but it could only be done after constitutional amendment, he further added.

“The present system of selection and elevation to higher judiciary has many shortcomings,” said Advocate High Court Noor Alam Khan, when contacted. Advocate Noor Alam Khan was of the opinion that objections such as lack of merit in selection of High Court Judges and less share of smaller provinces in Supreme Court are genuine.
The process of elevation to high court is stated in Article 193 of the 1973 constitution of Pakistan, which is about (1) age (not less than 45 years), (2) qualification- years of legal practice at high court (minimum 10 years).

Similarly, Article 175A (8) refers to Judicial Commission (for appointment of judges) that comprises of Chief Justice of Pakistan, four most senior judges of Supreme Court, one retired chief justice of Supreme Court or former judge of Supreme Court, federal minister of Law and Justice, Attorney General for Pakistan and a senior advocate Supreme Court nominated by Pakistan Bar Council.

The same judges who constitute Judicial Commission and are responsible for selection and elevation of judges into higher judiciary are also member of the Supreme Judicial Council, the only forum that decides the issues pertaining to accountability of the higher judiciary. For instance, in near past, we have the precedents of former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui of Islamabad High Court and very recently Justice Faiz Esa case in Supreme Judicial Council. It was also a shock to the nation when respectable Judge of Lahore High Court was named in Panama Leaks corruption case. Following the large number of cases, like corruption, misconduct or others, the selection system of the Higher Judiciary comes under serious questions. There is a growing public thinking that the Higher Judiciary might be made accountable to the system and the selection process of Higher Judiciary may be improved to restore public trust on the system.