The Supreme Court Wednesday ordered the Additional Attorney General for Pakistan to provide information, after verification, if the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) declined to assist Justice Qazi Faez's spouse about income tax return file, which was transferred from Karachi to Islamabad.

During the proceedings, counsel for Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) Salman Akram Raja informed the bench that it came to his knowledge that there was report in media that the petitioner's [Justice Faez] wife approached the FBR in order to obtain information about the income tax return file, transferred from Karachi to Islamabad. However, the FBR officials were not cooperative to her.

The bench in its order noted since the lady wife of Justice Faez had approached the tax authority, Islamabad, regarding tax return of her foreign properties then why the reference against the judge of this court be proceeded.

Justice Umar Ata Bandial, who was heading a larger bench, to hear the petitions against the presidential reference asked from Munir A Malik, counsel of the petitioner, to make submission about it.

Identical petitions have challenged the presidential reference against Justice Qazi Faez for allegedly not disclosing his foreign properties in wealth statements. Besides the apex court judge, Pakistan Bar Council, Supreme Court Bar Association, Bar Councils & Association of Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan, and Abid Hassan Manto and IA Rehman have also challenged the presidential reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa.

Munir stated that he is representing the petitioner and not his spouse. He further said that his client is not responsible for his wife's properties. He, however, submitted that Justice Faez's wife had approached the FBR in relation to the declaration under Section 118-A of Income Tax Ordinance (ITO) as the last date for filing returns is 31st January, 2020. He said that the FBR was non-cooperative with the petitioner's spouse.

The court order said; "If the wife of the judge is willing to disclose the information about the foreign properties then that information should be collected and brought before the court." The bench directed AAG Amir Rehman to come up with the information from the FBR on Monday (February 3).

Bilal Manto, representing Abid Hassan Manto and IA Rehman, contended that 18th constitutional amendment retained President in Article 209 (5) to act buffer between political government and the judiciary. He is expected to be independent and neutral. All complaints for inquiry against the judge of the superior court have to come from the President. They can't be sent directly to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC). He said that the President has to form independent opinion before sending the reference to the Council, adding if President is not in the Article 209 then anyone can send the complaint to the SJC, which would burden the Council.

Bilal contended that the President can order the authorities for collecting material in support of the complaint and not to verify the complaint.

Earlier, Salman Akram Raja argued that the President should have sought response of Justice Isa's wife and children regarding the properties, which are in their names. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said, "I am a tax payer and suppose I violate the tax law then whether the authority (FBR) will not issue me any notice."

Salman argued that the dignity of the judge and his wife has been violated. He said the Council is a fact-finding body and has to form opinion and the recommendation to the President on the basis of the fact. He said that the SJC is not a court and, therefore, the judicial review would be laid before this court.