Balochistan High Court

After the proclamation of emergency of November 3, 2007, Isa elected not to appear before judges who had violated their oath.^[11] Subsequently, after the Supreme Court declared the action of November 3, 2007 unconstitutional, all the then judges of the High Court of Balochistan tendered their resignation, and on August 5, 2009, Justice Isa was directly elevated to the position of Chief Justice of the High Court of Balochistan.^[11]

At the time of elevation, Justice Isa was the solitary judge in the Balochistan High Court.^[11] He thus nominated Judges to re-establish the Court, and re-opened the court in Sibi and Turbat.^[11] He went on to upgrade all courts in Balochistan, focusing on facilitating access and providing facilities to the public.^[11] Isa served as a member of the Pakistan Law and Justice Commission, the National Judicial (Policy Making) Committee and the Federal Judicial Academy. In his capacity as the Chief Justice of the Balochistan High Court, he was also the ex-officio Chairman of the Balochistan Judicial Academy. As the senior most Chief Justice of a High Court Isa served as a member of the Supreme Judicial Council.^[1][8]

Supreme Court of Pakistan

Justice Qazi Faez Isa took oath as a judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan on 5 September 2014, where he is currently the senior most Judge.^[1][8]

He strongly dissented in the case of District Bar Association Rawalpindi v Federation of Pakistan, which enabled the trial of civilians by military court.^[12] In the case of Sindh Revenue Board v Civil Aviation Authority, he held that 'neither the Federation nor the provinces should invade upon the rights of the other nor encroach on the other's legislative domain'.^[13]

In the case of suo moto proceedings regarding eligibility of the chairman, Sindh Public Service Commission, Justice Isa directed the Government of Sindh to 'ensure complete transparency in the process of selection and appointment respectively' of qualified candidates, as their 'performance and work would be far superior to the inept allowed in through the back door of nepotism and/or corruption'.^[14]

Justice Isa addressed illegalities in government projects in Suo Moto Case no. 19 of 2016, in which he observed that 'a small clique of persons is put in charge of these massive funds, avoiding established methods of checks and balances and circumventing the prescribed manner of implementing and executing of projects/schemes'.^[15]

In the case of Khalid Humayun v NAB, Justice Isa castigated the National Accountability Bureau for entering into a plea bargain with a government servant who was caught red handed with a large amount of cash.^[11] He held that 'the acceptance of the plea bargain by the chairman runs counter to the stated object [of the NAB Ordinance] to ‘eradicate corruption and to hold accountable all those persons accused of such practice’; instead, the message that emanates from NAB is that, if one surrenders only the amount which was seized he will be let off. The rising tide of insidious corruption devastates lives; this Court has repeatedly noted and warned about it, but it seems to no avail'.^[16]

Justice Isa was appointed by the Supreme Court as a single Judge Commission regarding terrorist attacks in Quetta on 8 August 2016 wherein 75 people (a majority of whom were lawyers) were killed. Justice Isa submitted the resultant Quetta Commission Report on 13 December 2016.^[17] In the judgment of Principal Public School Sangota v Sarbiland,^[18] the case of a girls school being attacked by terrorists was addressed by Justice Isa, condemning acts of terrorism by using Islamic injunctions regarding education and non violence.^[18]

In the Faizabad dharna judgment,^[19] Justice Isa addressed the constitutional right to free movement and the unconstitutional interference of intelligence agencies in Pakistan's political system.^[19] Within the judgment, it was observed that free publicity for extremist parties, and the broadcast of inflammatory speeches had allowed for protests to turn violent and spread across Pakistan.^[20] Justice Isa held that rights cannot be exercised by infringing on those of others. Thus, meetings or sit-ins could not be held on public roads without requisite permission.^[20] Censorship of the media was noted as unconstitutional, and it was held that 'no one, including any government, department or intelligence agency can curtail the fundamental right of freedom of speech, expression and press beyond the parameters mentioned in Article 19 of the Constitution.'^[20] Justice Isa held that 'politicking, and manipulation of media undermines the integrity of the armed forces',^[20] and that 'perception of ISI's involvement in matters that are not its concern remains'.^[20]

The case of Salamat Mansha Masih v The State^[21] involved the bail application of a Christian sanitary worker accused of blasphemy.^[22] Justice Isa held that 'abiding by Islamic jurisprudential principles, applying the constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair trial and due process, and acting prudently to ensure that an innocent is not convicted wrongly in respect of offences relating to religion, when there is only the improbable oral testimony of witnesses, then there must be corroboration'.^[23] Amnesty International described the judgment as 'a flicker of hope for human rights in South Asia'.^[24]

In Shah Zaman v Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,^[25] Justice Isa addressed the importance of forests in ecological preservation and mitigating the effects of climate change in light of Islamic injunctions.^[25]

In the military courts case, dealing with trials of civilians within military courts under Army Act 1952, Justice Isa was part of the initial larger bench formed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial. However, at the onset of proceedings J. Isa rose from the bench, claiming that "he did not consider the 9-member bench a bench". Despite Chief Justice Bandial requesting him to remain seated, he left the courtroom.^[26][27] Justice Isa's 30-page note explaining his reasoning for this was removed from the Supreme Court website. In it he stated that the Chief Justice should first decide the matter of Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act (2023), which dealt with the constitution of benches and right to appeal, before any other cases could be heard.^[27]

Presidential reference

In May 2019, 3 months after the release of the Faizabad dharna judgment,^[19] the President of Pakistan, on the advice of the Prime Minister, Imran Khan filed a reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa. The reference was later struck down by the Supreme Court.^[28]

It was alleged that properties belonging to Justice Isa's wife, Mrs. Sarina Isa, were actually his own, without issuing notice to her, or hearing her point of view.^[29] Mrs. Isa successfully challenged the order, establishing that she had an independent means of livelihood and was a separate taxpayer, since she started working in 1981.^[28][29]

In its detailed judgment, the Supreme Court found that the Reference filed against Justice Isa had been in 'wanton disregard of the law',^[30] with 'glaring lapses and procedural irregularities in the filing of the reference'.^[30]

In April 2022, former Prime Minister Imran Khan admitted that the filing of the reference against Justice Isa had been a 'mistake',^[31] and that 'relevant officials had misguided his government about the facts of the case'.^[31]

However, the government had filed a 'curative review' seeking review of the Supreme Court's decision.^[32] In July 2022, the Federal Cabinet led by Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif announced that it would withdraw the 'curative review'.^[33][34] This was done so in March 2023, with Prime Minister Sharif observing that the reference had been 'on flimsy and political grounds', and 'meant to harass and intimidate'.^[35] In July 2023, a petition against the withdrawal of the review was dismissed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial.^[36]

Transparency and disclosure

In response to a freedom of information request by the Women's Action Forum, Justice Isa was the only judge who published details of all his assets, income, and privileges on the Supreme Court website.^[37] His wife, Mrs. Sarina Isa also voluntarily did so.^[37]

Chief Justice of Pakistan

He was notified as the next Chief Justice of Pakistan on 21 June 2023 by President Arif Alvi.^[38] On 17 September 2023, he took oath as the 29th Chief Justice of Pakistan at a ceremony in Aiwan-e-Sadr.^[39] He is set to remain the Chief Justice until 25 October 2024.^[40]

In the Aitzaz Ahsan v The State case dealing with the issue of missing persons who are extra-judicially abducted by the country's security agencies, J. Isa was being presented a list of the individuals belonging to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) who had been abducted in the wake of the May 9 riots. At this he remarked, "if you can’t stand the heat in the kitchen you should not be in the kitchen", before chastising the lawyer for making the case political.^[41] Further during the hearing, the case of Imran Riaz and his 4-month long disappearance was brought up, at which J. Isa remarked, "Who is he?".^[42] The next day, Riaz offered to come to the courtroom at the guarantee of security to narrate what had happened to him in custody. In response, J. Isa, stated that "the apex court doesn’t have force, and if he wants to give statement, they would not stop him".^[43] During the proceeding, J. Isa has resolved to fix the issue of missing persons "once and for all".^[44]

In Sardar Qaisarani vs The State, the matter of lifetime disqualification from public office under article 62(1)(f) of the constitution is subjudice. J. Isa has termed the disqualification "against Islam", while stating "how can the court close the door to repentance if the God didn't".^[45] On 9 January 2024, the bench under J. Isa announced a 6-1 majority verdict with J. Yahya Afridi dissenting. The verdict set aside the earlier interpretation of lifetime disqualification for the article, stating that it violated fundamental rights, and instead set a 5-year disqualification for lawmakers who fail the moral standard of “sadiq and ameen” (honest and righteous).^[46] The timing of the verdict ensured that lawmakers disqualified from running for public office under 62(1)(f) in earlier judgements were eligible to contest the upcoming 2024 elections. Prominent among these are former prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, who was disqualified in the Panama Papers case in 2017 and Jahangir Tareen, the chief of Istehkam-e-Pakistan Party, who was disqualified the same year for concealment of assets.^[46][47]

PTI intra-party elections case

On 13 January 2024, a three-member Supreme Court bench led by Isa upheld the decision of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), overturning a prior reversal of the ECP's order by a bench of the Peshawar High Court (PHC). The initial ECP order stated that PTI was unable to comply with an earlier directive to conduct intra-party elections according to its constitution, rendering them ineligible to keep their election symbol, the cricket bat.^[48][49]