+ Enlarge this image

From left - Lawyer Sheid Hussein, accountant Pravin Singh and Mohammed Samshood yesterday

THE military has been told by a High Court judge not to interfere with the courts.

Justice Filimoni Jitoko issued the warning after a partly-heard case before him was referred by a defendant to the military.

Bashir Khan and Vunimoli Sawmill Ltd are suing Mohammed Samshood and Rozeena Bano for non-performance of a contract to buy the sawmill for $900,000.

Justice Jitoko, in his judgment, said after a hearing early this year, Samshood decided to seek the military's assistance, purportedly to influence the outcome of the proceedings in his favour.

"It is my understanding from counsel for the plaintiff (Dr Shamsud Dean Sahu Khan) that both parties and their respective counsels were summoned to the military camp where discussions were reportedly held on this case,"said Justice Jitoko.

He said a letter from the military to the court had tried to explain its efforts in this regard.

"Let me make this very clear. It is not, I repeat not, the military or for that matter any agency or organisation other than this court that will make the determination and the final decision in this case and this must hold true in all other civil matters,"Justice Jitoko said.

He said the independence of the court and the judiciary was premised on a clear understanding that matters would be decided impartially in accordance with the law.

"Independence of the judiciary means that the courts will not be threatened, pressured, induced or interfered with from anyone in carrying out its functions.

"Independence implies impartiality and freedom from or rejection of improper influences in the conduct of the work of the court and in reaching its judgments and conclusions."

Justice Jitoko said he viewed the intrusion of the military on behalf of the defendants in this case with grave concern, no matter how well intentioned the act may have been. "The simple fact is that the matter is before the court awaiting its decision and any attempt to interfere with it, be it directly or otherwise, is tantamount to contempt,"he said.

Justice Jitoko said what was serious in this instance was what appeared to be the acquiescence of Mr (Sheik) Shah for the matter to be referred to the military.

Mr Shah is the lawyer for the defendant.

"It is the solemn duty of the counsel as an officer of the court and to which he has duly sworn an oath to observe and abide by the rules and conventions that not only governed the conduct of its affairs but at the same time ensure the integrity of the institution is maintained and safeguarded,"he said. "In this case it was the duty of Mr Shah to advise the parties on what amounts to appropriate behaviour and what does not."Justice Jitoko said Mr Shah was found wanting in his duties to the court.

"As it turns out, this court has already found on the merits alone in favour of the defendants. This, however, does not diminish its concern of the attempt to interfere in its independence and ultimately its impartiality,"he said.

Outside court, Mr Shah said he was concerned about the serious allegations made against him.

He said that he had no prior knowledge about the case being referred by his client to the military. "I had no idea and I was shocked when I was summoned to the camp.

"I will, therefore, write to the Chief Justice tomorrow regarding the case,"he said.

Back to Top