Justice Faez Isa’s participation in the National Assembly session has provoked a discussion on the judiciary, which according to many stands “divided”. While some believed the timing was not appropriate, others thought the senior puisne judge could have been seated at a better place.

On Monday, Asma Shirazi discussed this reaction and the solution to the crisis on her show Faisla Aap Ka. She presented statements from Justice Isa, Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, and PPP co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari before talking about the development in Parliament.

Zardari said: “We have created Pakistan, and it is our obligation to save it. I vow that I will not leave behind a broken Pakistan for the future generation. God willing, nothing will happen to the Constitution. We will not allow anyone to play [with it]. We can request the PM for a dialogue with the opposition. But they have to come to him. You cannot have a pre-requisite position [for dialogue]. We know more than you think we know. We are quite aware of who is who and where is what.”

Bilawal said: “In order to have a PM for 10 years, some judges have to be given an extension so here was a selected PM, there a selected CJP, and a selected army chief. There would have been selected martial law in Pakistan. We thought democracy succeeded and the conspiracy ended after the no-confidence motion was completed. But we were wrong as a conspiracy is still going.”

Isa said: “On behalf of myself and my institution that we stand with this book (the Constitution). This book is our identity, Pakistan’s identity. The elected representatives of the time unanimously voted on it, there was no negative vote. There were four abstentions I think. Speaker I had asked prior to attending today’s gathering if political matters would be talked about. But you assured me that only constitutional matters would be talked about. But a lot of political things were talked about. I have no relation to the political things talked about during today’s gathering. Don’t be offended, it is possible they say or you say tomorrow that we called you yet you decided against us.”

Muneeb Farooq and Mazhar Abbas, and legal expert Hamid Khan were the guests on the show.

Khan was of the view that there was no issue in going to Parliament under normal circumstances, however, it was appropriate to attend the session if the chief justice of Pakistan was supposed to go. But he lamented that the “so much stress” environment amid the division in the judiciary.

“There are attempts at creating divisions in the judiciary.”

Khan, the former president of the Supreme Court bar, went on to add that the timing was not good. He used the word “optics” to make his point amid a perception that Parliament was going to attack the judiciary and curtail its rights.

No one knows with whom the majority stands, he stated when asked Justice Isa apparently presented the other side in the judiciary. The legal expert stressed the need for unity among the judges to build people’s confidence in the judiciary.

Journalist Abbas agreed with Khan and said that judges speak by their judgements. “This is not just said about judges but also about the editors of the newspaper that they should not mix up and do not go in public functions as somewhere your conflict of interest comes when you make such a move.”

But according to Farooq, there was no issue with Justice Isa attending Parliament session amid the ongoing situation. “I think Justice Isa was cautious by saying that there was no link to politics. I think it could have been said in a better way and other issues could have been raised,” he said and added that it would have been better if the SC judge was being sat at a better place as a guest on honour.

“I heard Justice Isa say more judges were supposed to come but they were busy and did not come. So if more judges were to come were they supposed to sit with the PM and Zardari Sb? I think the host should have made better arrangements. I think it was a poor show as far as the parliament is concerned. He should have been sat in a separate place.”

When asked about the solution to the crisis, legal expert Khan answered dialogue. He added that the top court should itself resolve its apparent division and the CJP should take such a “big” initiative.

He disagreed with the concept that the CJP was a “peter familias” but the head of the institution. “I think a stitch in time saves nine is appropriate to say,” Khan said, adding that the formation of a full court from the start would have been better.

Senior journalist Abbas said the apex court can call a full court meeting to decide the way forward while discussing the overall conduct of the court. He went on to say that the apparent division creates an impression about the next-in-line chief justice among the people.

Farooq agreed with Zardari that dialogue cannot be held on a pre-condition. But he added that the premier should also make room for negotiation. Taking a cue from a fellow journalist, Abbas the premier could have formed a committee in Monday’s session on dialogue.