LAHORE: The quest for justice by a former judge of the Supreme Court has yet again exposed the flaws of Pakistan’s judicial system which ranks 130th in the world and has repeatedly failed to deliver inexpensive and speedy justice to the masses.

Late Justice (retd) Syed Jamshed Ali Shah, who expired in 2019, was first made judge of Lahore High Court in 1998 and was elevated to the Supreme Court of Pakistan in 2005. He later retired as Judge of the Supreme Court in 2008.

Jamshed was allotted a plot in Lahore Development Authority’s Avenue One in 2003 and paid Rs 570,000 in installments including development charges. On LDA’s demand, he paid an additional amount of Rs 340,000 but the plot was not transferred to him even after 13 long years while 321 other allottees were also given alternative plots.

As a last resort, Justice Jamshed approached Lahore High Court in 2017 against LDA in search of justice. However, his petition was meted out the same treatment as of a common litigant. His case moved from one court to another a decision eluded him in the 17 hearings that took place in four years, before five different judges.

When Justice Jamshed approached the LHC in 2017, his petition was fixed before Justice Abid Aziz Sheikh who immediately sought LDA’s reply. But there was no major headway and the case lingered on over one pretext or the other.

Justice Sheikh at LHC held only eight hearings in three years in Jamshed’s case until 2020, after which the case was transferred to Justice Sajid Mehmood Sethi. The case was soon transferred to Justice Shahid Karim but hardly any progress was made. Justice Asim Hafeez was the third judge who heard the case but could not get a report from LDA about the pending matter.

Presently, Justice Ali Baqar Najfi is adjudicating upon the case and has directed the DG LDA to furnish the report or get ready to face the music.  Justice had also ordered personal appearance of DG LDA in the next hearing.

Interestingly, Justice Jamshed was the member of the justice and law commission , a highest forum of law-making and reforms, at the time when he faced the LDA maltreatment. Jamshed also wrote a letter to then Director General LDA Ahad Cheema, complaining that his staff was expecting a handsome reward from him to clear his plot. He asked Ahmed Cheema to hand him over the possession of the plot and initiate legal proceedings against his staff for their unjust demand.

But despite that, the LDA failed to budge. In face of such inordinate delay, Jamshed was of the view that he was being discriminated against, which was not permissible under the Constitution and the prevalent law.

Commenting on the situation, President Lahore High Court Bar Association Maqsood Butt said he was astonished to know that a former judge of the Supreme Court could not get justice on the matter. “This is an eye opener for the government and the judiciary. If an influential and known personality is going from pillar to post in search of justice, one can imagine the plight and ordeal of a common man in the courts,” he lamented.

He pointed out that according to a recent report by the World Justice Project, Pakistan was ranked 130th out of 139 nations around the world because our judicial system had failed to deliver inexpensive and speedy justice to the masses.  He said as per the law and justice commission of Pakistan’s report, more than 2.1 million cases are pending in the country’s courts from lower judiciary to the apex court.

“Litigants are the main stakeholders of our judicial system but the million dollar question is whether they are getting any benefits of it.” Maqsood said the judges enjoyed all perks and privileges while the litigants did not even had access to clean drinking water or decent seating arrangements at the court premises. He admitted that the lawyers fraternity should also play a key role to reduce the woes of litigants.

Many people are unsatisfied with the Judicial system of the country. They have lost faith in the judicial system, he concluded.

President Lahore Bar Association Malik Sarood said no one could believe that a judge of the highest court died waiting for justice. He said under article 199 of the Constitution, a writ petition is an speedy and efficacious remedy. But after four years, the case of a judge is still at initial stage is unbelievable and highly deplorable. “The judiciary and other stakeholders must realise that justice delayed is justice denied. They must provide instant, effective and cheap justice to the citizens of the country.”

A senior lawyer, Ch Shafiq, commenting on Jamshed’s ordeal, said in fact the judiciary which is the ultimate authority responsible for dispensing justice, itself is badly in need of reforms to ensure that justice is delivered to common citizen in an impartial, apolitical, speedy and fair manner. In particular, the working of lower level judiciary suffers from reports of rampant corruption and inefficiency.

There are frequent reports that judges at lower levels fail to apply their mind or indulge in corrupt practices while issuing legally unjustified stay orders resulting in avoidable prolonged litigation and hardship to those affected adversely by them.

Vice Chairman Punjab Bar Council, Farhan Shehzad said no one could deny the fact that lawyers and judiciary had failed to provide inexpensive and speedy justice to the citizens. He, however, said the parliament should also bring in viable legislation to improve things. “Civil procedural law is too complicated and confusing and shrewd lawyers and litigants use it to their benefits,” rued Farhan.

He narrated an incident where a land grabber illegally occupied the land of a poor villager who filed a suit in civil court but it remained undecided for more than 10 years. “Therefore, an illegal occupant is enjoying the benefits of the land while the real owner has become a frequent visitor to the court in search of justice which looks like a distant dream.”

Shamimur Rehman Malik, former secretary Supreme Court Bar Association, said the judiciary should take Justice Jamshad’s case as a test case to revamp the judicial system to ease the miseries of the litigants. “Delayed justice and corruption are the main reasons behind people’s distrust in the institution. Civil litigation goes on for generations without any end and I know many litigants who turned old while pursuing their cases in civil courts without much success.”

“Judiciary is the last hope for the downtrodden section of the society but they face unbearable lengthy and expensive litigation,” lamented Shamim. “A poor person does not have social connections in influential places to resolve their problems quickly. Hence he approaches the court in a hope to get his due. But the inordinate delay, exorbitant fees of lawyers and bribes demanded by the court staff on each visit pushes the poor litigant to brink of collapse. All this must end now.”

He disclosed that the government introduced certain amendments in the civil laws in order to decide the civil cases within a short time, but the move drew severe criticism and resistance from the lawyers and left the common man void of any hope whatsoever of getting speedy justice.