"We have apprehensions that the CIA and GHQ may destabilise the system," said Kamal Azfar, representative of the Federation, in response to a query of the Supreme Court about Federation's petition cautioning the court to mitigate against 'destabilisation of rule of law' in deciding the petitions against National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), here on Monday.
After facing numerous questions about apprehensions of his client (federation) from the bench, Kamal Azfar said there were extra-constitutional forces within and outside of the country, which wanted destabilise the system. "If you want me to say openly, we have apprehensions from the CIA and the GHQ". However, he did not mention either it was his personal view or of the federation.
A 17-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, directed the counsel to submit a written statement supported by cogent reasons behind apprehensions filed by Azfar in a 12-page statement on December 10 in which he had claimed that Pakistan was poised at a crossroads with one road leading to a democratic welfare state and the other to destabilisation of the rule of law. Additionally, the court requested an affidavit of his client (Secretary, Law) on Tuesday.
"It is the duty of the executive to counter any such threat and has nothing to do with the court," observed the bench. Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed observed that "we are least scared; if you are scared, then tell us in writing so that we could pass an order". The court expressed displeasure over the apprehension that a court decision could be tantamount to 'destabilisation of rule of law', and directed the counsel to substantiate the statement.
The court repeatedly asked Azfar to identify those under whose instructions he had filed the statement. After equivocating several times, Kamal Azfar finally adopted an interesting position by saying that he had filed the December 10 statement in his personal capacity. In addition, he requested the court to allow him to delete some paras from the statement.
Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed observed: "We will not allow deletion; disclose reasons for the apprehensions". Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday remarked that "cases of murder, dacoity, rape and embezzlement are before us; do you want us to shut our eyes and become party to these crimes otherwise the country would destabilise...we are as concerned with democracy as is any other citizen".
Replying to the observation, Azfar said that there were forces which wanted to destabilise the system. However, the application had prayed the court to declare NRO void and try all those against whom cases were pending. "Give us this in writing, after consultation with your client (federation)", observed the bench.
The Chief Justice remarked: "Tell us about those forces bent on destabilising the system", and recalled "how a seven-member bench of this court declared November 3, 2007 PCO illegal and unconstitutional and that saved the system". "Today, we are not handicapped to pass any such injunction," he added.
Justice Javed Iqbal observed: "In my opinion, when (I) heard arguments against Article 62 and 63 (qualification of Parliamentarian), the government thought to do something prior to anything from the court. You are representing Ministry of Law, and it cannot give any such direction," he added.
Earlier, Chairman of National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Naveed Ahsan, submitted a report regarding 60 million dollars, frozen in Swiss accounts through a money-laundering reference against President Asif Ali Zardari. The court termed the report, given by NAB Swiss Case, as incomplete, and asked for a complete report with supporting documents. The NAB chairman will submit the detailed report here on Tuesday.
On December 9, after going though the list of NRO beneficiaries submitted by the NAB, the court had directed the Bureau to submit a detailed record of the money spent by the government in pursuing the case, status of the case, claim of the government over the money and justification for shifting the case record from Geneva to London.
NAB Chairman Naveed Ahsan said that Rs 188.347 million (about 19 crore) was given to Swiss lawyers while Rs 4.1 million was spent on the foreign visits of 17 government officials. Justice Tassadaq Hussain Jilani pointed out a dual statement given in the NAB report that sentence against the late Benazir Bhutto and Asif Zardari had attained finality, however, were declared innocent later on.
The report said that neither Benazir Bhutto nor Asif Ali Zardari had been legally served in the investigation and had not been associated with the investion proceedings and claimed their total innocence as the case was false and fabricated and politically motivated, as such they filed objections pursuant to their right under the order. On May 22, 2008 the Attorney General for Pakistan wrote to the prosecutor general in Geneva in the following terms:
'We hereby confirm that the Republic of Pakistan having not suffered any damage withdraws in capacity of civil party not only against Asif Ali Zardari but also against Jens Schlegelmich and any other third party concerned by these proceedings. The Republic of Pakistan thus confirms entirely the withdrawal of its request of judicial assistance and its complements, objects of the proceedings.
Request for mutual assistance made by the then government, which already stand withdrawn, was politically motivated. Contract was awarded to pre-shipment inspection companies in good faith in discharge of official function by the state functionaries in accordance with rules. The Republic of Pakistan further confirms having withdrawn itself as a damaged party and apologised for the inconvenience caused to the Swiss authorities', said the report.
"After spending Rs 2 billion over the case, you have reached the conclusion that cases were false," observed the bench, adding, "what action has been taken against responsible for filing false case". The court also questioned why claim of government over the money was withdrawn by apologising the Swiss. Advocate A K Dogar, counsel for Feroz Shah, contended that the President cannot issue an ordinance in his personal capacity without an advice from the Prime Minister.
The presidential power to issue ordinance is a legacy of the British Raj as both in UK and USA such power is non-existent. He said that President Asif Ali Zardari was sentenced for 3 years under Section 31-F of NAB Ordinance in BMW case. The court adjourned the hearing for Tuesday. Later, Acting Attorney-General, Shah Khawar, told this scribe that the statement made by Advocate Kamal Azfar about his client's apprehensions was in his personal capacity.
Comments
Comments are closed.