ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) granted one-month time to the federal government to submit its reply in a petition of Mian Najamus Saqib, son of former chief justice Saqib Nisar, challenging a Special Committee constituted by the speaker National Assembly to audit, inquire into, and investigate ‘audio leaks’ involving him.
A single bench of Justice Babar Sattar, on Monday, heard the petition moved by Najam through his counsels, Sardar Latif Khosa and Shoaib Shaheen advocate. The petitioner cited the federation through the secretary Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and the speaker National Assembly and the chairman of the Special Committee as respondents.
During the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan argued that in his view a parliamentary committee could not initiate proceedings against an individual, Najamus Saqib. He added that an audio tape of a private person was not related to the National Assembly. The AGP maintained that a parliamentary body could not notice in this manner.
He urged the court to dismiss the petition as it had become infructuous after the dissolution of the assembly. However, Justice Babar asked him whether electronic surveillance is allowed. Who could do it? He added that the PTA says it did not allow anyone. He further said that the question is, how the electronic surveillance is being done and who is doing it. He maintained that if somebody has been allowed, then who allowed it and to whom?
Usman replied that this is not on record that a government agency has recorded it. He continued that if it was on record then the question arises of who has allowed it.
Justice Babar then asked if he is saying that some foreign agency has done the recording. He also said audios of Prime Minister’s House, the Prime Minster, his family, and the family of a chief justice have been leaked. The AGP stated that he does not say that it was done by a foreign agency.
The IHC bench said that this act without taking the state into confidence is a very dangerous decision. He asked who the competent authority is with regard to the audio tape recording.
The court questioned if the Attorney General is taking position that it was not the government and it was recorded without the government’s authority. He also said that leaking such audios without taking the state into confidence is a grave decision. He added that the Benazir Bhutto case is our history, when it happened. How could it happen, what is the check and balance, if the data is not being misused?
The judge remarked that the government constituted a judicial commission but the question, who leaks these audios, was not included in its terms of reference. The attorney general requested for an in-camera hearing of the case. However, the bench said it will see it “after you submit your reply”.
The bench observed that the AGP should consult the prime minister and the cabinet and there must be a legal framework with regard to audio taping.
Amicus curiae Mian Raza Rabbani, in his written submissions, stated that the petition has become ineffective. “All the committees’ orders have become infructuous after the dissolution of the assembly,” he said.
He maintained that the court should not look into this matter on its own but send it back to the committee. He added that after the dissolution of the National Assembly, all orders issued by committees became ineffective.
Later, the court clubbed together the petitions filed by former premier Imran Khan’s wife Bushra Bibi and former PM’s aide Zulfi Bukhari against summons by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) in connection with audio leaks. He added that the court will allow the federal government time to submit its reply but the legal ambit of audio taping must be clarified as to who is recording audios and under what authority.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2023
Comments
Comments are closed.