The appointments of fifteen special assistants to Prime Minister Imran Khan have been challenged in Islamabad High Court (IHC). Farrukh Nawaz Bhatti filed a petition through his counsel GM Chaudhary and cited the Prime Minister and fifteen special assistants including Naeemul Haq, Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan, Nadeem Afzal, Ali Nawaz Awan, Zulfi Bukhari, Shahzad Akbar, Dr Moeed Yusuf, Usman Dar and others as respondents.
Bhatti sought declaration of sub-rule (6) of Rule 4 of the Rules of Business, 1973, as ultra vires to the Constitution and illegal. He contended that the appointments of the special assistants are burden on debt-trapped national economy, adding 'misuse' of public office and discretion are only to accommodate friends and cronies on public expense without having specialization in the relevant fields to be known or said as Special Assistants to the Prime Minister (SAPM). He maintained that a few SAPM have dual nationalities and therefore they are not entitled to hold offices or status as the federal minister or the minister of the state.
"All such appointments are liable to be set aside, void ab initio from their dates of appointment with a further direction to declare the actions, decisions or exercise of any power under any law as well as receipt of any financial benefit including their salaries, allowances, perks, privileges, etc, as illegal, void ab initio, coram non judice and illegal gain and to direct for recovery of such salaries, allowances, perks, privileges, etc, from the special assistants," added the petition.
It further said that as far as their competence and expertise in their respective areas allocated to them is questionable as there is no any noteworthy and substantial contribution of them towards Pakistan and its governance system except they had enjoyed the friendly relations or managed their appointments by using undue influence and receiving hefty salaries, allowances, perks and privileges.
He aimed that Moeed Yusuf (respondent No 11) had been staying since long in the United State of America and worked for different think tanks and his loyalty and obedience towards the Constitution is not certain as it is apprehended that such persons are a threat to national security as such persons have to return to their original positions and countries like Hussain Haqqani with all state secrets with further apprehension of the Memogate like situation for Pakistan, maintained the petitioner.
He, therefore, prayed to the court to declare Rule 4(6) of the Rules of Business, 1973, is ultra vires to the Constitution and the law, illegal, coram non judice and being such is liable to be set aside ab initio and be set aside in the interest of constitutionalism in the country.
Bhatti also requested the court to declare the appointments of the special assistants and conferring upon them the status of the ministers of the state and the federal ministers (as the case may be) as illegal, ultra vires to the law and the Constitution.
He continued that the court may declare the actions, decisions or exercise of any power under any law as well as receipt of any financial benefit including their salaries, allowances, perks, privileges, etc, as illegal, void ab initio and illegal gain and direct for recovery of such salaries, allowances, perks, privileges, etc, from the special assistants as the arrears of land revenue.
The petitioner also requested the court to direct the Respondent No 19 (National Accountability Bureau) to investigate and inquire the acts of the Respondent No 1 to 18 in terms of section 9 of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 or any other law relevant on the subject of misuse of power and discretion.
Comments
Comments are closed.