Declaring that "no one is above the law", the Supreme court in a marathon hearing on Thursday, said that Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani should write a letter to Swiss authorities to reopen graft cases against President Asif Ali Zardari.
An eight-member bench led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was hearing an Intra Court Appeal (ICA) filed by Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani, seeking exemption from appearing before the court in contempt charges on February 13.
During the course of hearing, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry said the proceedings against the Prime Minister would end if he wrote a letter to the Swiss authorities to reopen cases of alleged money laundering against President Zardari.
The CJP also observed that although the person involved in these cases was the head of the Prime Minister's party, "no one is above the law." Aitzaz Ahsan, the counsel for the prime minister, submitted that court orders in relation to National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) implementation could not be linked to the show cause notice served on the Prime Minister.
Addressing Ahsan, Justice Jawad S. Khawaja said, "if you want to discharge show cause notice in the contempt of court matter then you should tell us how to implement the NRO judgement...and give us an alternative." Ahsan urged the bench that his client could be given benefit of doubt, arguing that the premier did not write a letter against President Zardari to Switzerland in good faith in the light of a summary by Federal Ministry of Law. He further pleaded that such action of the premier was not based on any criminal intention to defy court orders.
Ahsan repeatedly argued in his submissions that the court in its order on February 2 had cited no specific reason to initiate contempt of court proceedings against the Prime Minister. Aitzaz contended that the seven-judge bench summoned his client for framing charge, but it did not give reasons. Justice Amir Hani Muslim noted that had the bench given reasons, it would have been harmful to the premier.
Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, while commenting on the content of the filed ICA's paragraph 45, asked: Should the Premier be given a free hand to do anything because he had restored the judges? Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali observed that prima facie there was only one legal point in the ICA that premier's attorney was not heard properly in the matter in hand.
On the occasion, the bench directed the premier's counsel to remove some "objectionable" questions of law, including paragraphs 45, 51 and 52, from the plea. In these paragraphs, Ahsan had challenged the contempt case initiated against his client, arguing: Could a premier, who undid the draconian action of a military dictator (arrest of judges of the superior courts, including the Chief Justice) even before he had taken oath as Prime Minister, be presumed to have contemplated committing contempt?
Ahsan raised as many as 54 questions of law in the ICA filed against a seven-member bench that had re-summoned premier on February 13 for framing contempt of court charges. Ahsan raised the questions of law to substantiate his argument that the premier did not defy the court order by restraining from writing a letter to Swiss authorities on reopening the cases against President Zardari.
The bench noted that not only would the government be required to write a letter to the Swiss authorities but to some other countries as well. Justice Tariq Parvez observed that even if the PM was convicted on contempt charges, a letter in the matter would have to be written. On the occasion, without naming President Zardari, the CJP noted that in an interview with a private television channel it was stated that the letter would not be written until the PPP government was in power. "Is it not disobedience of the 17-judge bench order?" the CJP asked.
To a query whether the government had done something to bring back the looted money, Ahsan said para 178 of the NRO judgement related to opening of Swiss cases could not be implemented. When the cases in Switzerland were abandoned, there was no possibility of bringing $60 million back, he said. "The prime minister has certainly been ill advised," Justice Mian Saqib Nisar remarked.
The CJP observed that the contempt trial of an incumbent premier was not an ordinary thing, adding that he regretted it and said that if the PM did not want to write a letter, he should remove the judges and bring his partymen to sit in the apex court. He questioned what would be the stock market trends when the prime minister would be appearing in the trial proceedings on a daily basis. Later, the bench directed Ahsan to conclude his arguments in the matter till Friday (today). The hearing was adjourned till February 10.
Comments
Comments are closed.