A SUPREME Court bench has declared it will be framing charges against nine judges who took oath under Gen. Musharraf's PCO on Nov. 3, 2007. These justices had contested the allegation that by doing so they had violated the court's order issued against the PCO the same day. Wednesday's judgment was notable for declaring that justices are not exempt from contempt proceedings due to their status as members of the higher judiciary. It does carry with it an element of even-handedness, indicating that no one, regardless of their position or status, is above the law. It also reaffirms that the judicial system will not stand for its members supporting any steps that would compromise its independence through extra-constitutional means, writes the Dawn in its editorial. The judgment has, however, paved the way for a trial in the SC that will pit one group of superior court judges against another in public view. Although they have been made dysfunctional, most of those being charged have not yet retired. There seems to be no precedent in Pakistan's history for sitting judges being tried by their colleagues for contempt of court. Although this does not invalidate Wednesday's judgment, it does indicate a need for propriety in the conduct of the trial. Supreme Court Bar Association President Asma Jahangir has suggested that the Supreme Judicial Council would be a better forum, but there is some danger this would result in proceedings simply being dropped. SJC hearings can only be initiated by the president, and it is unclear if he would be willing to do so in this case. But the spirit of her objection is worth taking into consideration; some level of propriety must be maintained, and the judiciary must not expose itself to a perception of point-scoring on personal or political grounds. There is also a view that the bench is singling out PCO judges by not charging Gen. Musharraf, former prime minister Shaukat Aziz and corps commanders at the time, among others, for disobeying the Nov. 3 order, and it would be welcome if the Supreme Court clarified its position on the matter. __
