Judgment on NAO 1999: SC dismisses KP’s plea for live-stream proceeding of ICA

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court by a majority of 4-1 dismissed Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa’s petition to live-stream the proceeding of the Federation’s intra-court appeal (ICA) against its judgment on National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999.

A five-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Aminud Din Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Athar Minallah, and Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, on Thursday, heard the ICA and the petitions of some individuals, whose applications have been pending before the Islamabad High Court (IHC).

Makhdoom Ali Khan, who represented the Federation, concluded his arguments. The AGP has adopted them. The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan, currently incarcerated at Adiala Jail, attended the hearing through video-link, wearing dark blue shirt. In his first courtroom interaction with CJP Qazi Faez, Imran complained of difficulties and sought legal assistance of lawyers.

At the end of the hearing, the chief justice asked Imran whether he wanted to address the Court or would rely on Khawaja Haris’s submission, as the matter was a bit technical. Imran replied that he would speak himself and take half an hour.

The PTI founder told the chief justice; “For me, this is the most supreme national interest case.” He complained they (the jail authorities) do not let him meet with his legal team. “I am being kept in solitary confinement here. I neither have any material nor a library to prepare for the case.”

When Imran told the chief justice about his other cases, and that he was implicated in false cases. Justice Faez told him not to speak about them, as they are presently hearing the NAB amendment case.

The chief justice then asked advocate Khawaja Haris to meet with Imran Khan in prison, saying “Khan Sahib you will meet with your legal team and the Court can not stop from this.” He directed the SC office to provide him with all the documents, related to the case.

At the onset of the proceeding, Advocate General KP Shah Faisal Uthmankhel came to the rostrum and submitted that he had filed an application for live-streaming of the proceeding, complaining it was not done in the last hearing. He contended that this is a matter of public importance and the first hearing of the case was telecast live.

The chief justice stated there was no public matter and the technical issues are involved in the case, adding the case was related to NAB amendments. Upon that, Justice Athar said: “I think it should be streamed live as its first hearing was shown live on TV channels.”

The AG KP then requested the Court to decide his application one or the other way. He said Rs150 billion were looted by the corrupt leaders. The chief justice stopped him from arguing and told him that the case was filed by an individual (Imran Khan), while the KP province did not show interest in the case.

Justice Athar said: “The proceeding ought to be live-streamed, and repeated that this is a matter of public interest.” The chief justice said; “We have allowed respondent No 1 to appear through video-link.” The CJP then took a half-an-hour break to discuss the matter. However, the bench was assembled after approximately one hour.

When it resumed hearing, the chief justice said: “Sorry we have kept everyone waiting.” He said that such a request was not made earlier, and did not want the matter (KP’s application) to be decided in a hurry.

“We have discussed the matter and by majority of 4-1 declined the request of KP government for live-streaming of the proceeding.” “The respondent No 1 will have access to the court’s proceeding through video-link,” he added.

Justice Jamal questioned “why the lawmakers decided such cases in the Parliament, why do they bring such matter in the courts.” He remarked that when a judgment was passed in their favour then they appreciate the courts but when the case is decided against them they start criticising the verdicts.

Justice Jamal said, “I’ll speak about myself. I use social media and read newspapers. The prime minister [Shehbaz Sharif], a few days ago, in a function, called the judges ‘blacksheep’.” Justice Athar said; “Don’t take us as blacksheep, but as black bumblebee.”

Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan, present in the courtroom, came to the rostrum and clarified that he (PM) used these words for erstwhile judges, and not the sitting ones.

Justice Jamal further said that NAB law affected the parliamentarians and if they wanted to reduce or enhance the sentence under the law then they could do so. The Court would only examine the constitutionality of the law.

Justice Athar said that Section 9a(v) of the NAO was diluted by the courts themselves, adding that in the suspension of sentence of Nawaz Sharif and numerous other cases Section 9a(v) has been diluted. He also questioned “why the judges and generals are treated as sacred cows and why not they be tried under the NAB law.” He said “there is a judgment of the IHC which says that the armed forces are not exempt from the NAB law.”

Makhdoom Ali Khan argued that there is nothing in the law that prevent the NAB authorities to proceed against them [judges and generals]. However, a reference, for not taking action against them, is always made to Asfandyar Wali judgment. It is done to secure the independence of the courts.

Justice Athar then asked the counsel whether he defended the Ordinance issued by the governments. Makhdoom said; “I don’t support any legislation done through Ordinances,” adding very restrictive criteria is given in Article 189 of the constitution regarding the issuance of the Ordinances. The case was adjourned until next week.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024