COMMENT: A question of judiciary's independence.

Byline: Abdul Moiz Jaferii

IF you ask lawyers what kind of clients are the most difficult, everyone will usually have a different opinion to offer. Ask Justice Faez Isa's lawyers, and whatever their previous vieAw, their opinion may have changed recently.

As we have seen in the proceedings before the 10-member full bench of the Supreme Court, it seems the most troublesome clients are judges themselves.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa only challenged the Supreme Judicial Council proceedings filed against him by the President after a show cause notice was issued to him by the body. This delay is being used by Farogh Naseem as evidence of his having surrendered to the SJC process, and argues Justice Isa has hence 'missed the bus' for challenging it. Justice Isa continues to file replies to miscellaneous applications on his own accord, signing and submitting them himself.

Facing a government allegation of misconduct which is being repeatedly exposed as an amateur frolic into investigation, Justice Isa embarked on an amateur investigation of his own. The government tried to answer how it discovered the properties belonging to Justice Isa's wife and children in England as they could not have simply been searched for in the land registry, as first claimed.

This was an important development as the judge's legal team was alleging that such information could only have been attained through illegal surveillance of him and his family.

The government says this information is easily searchable, and cites as examples the use of a website, 192.com, where upon payment of a fee, proprietary holdings can be searched by entering names.

Justice Isa responded firstly by highlighting how such an exercise would require a payment for the services along with a date of receipt, details of which have been withheld from the court. He alleged that these dates and payments are absent as they would prove that this website search was an afterthought to cover up the illegal surveillance he alleges was the actual method of information gathering.

Then Justice Isa did some searching on 192.com himself. Various entries carrying names similar to those of the prime minister, the former special assistant on information and broadcasting, as well as that of the Asset Recovery Unit chief turned up. Justice Isa submitted these results to the court.

When doing so he clarified that he was not making any allegations and was only highlighting how the individuals named still deserve due process of...