ISLAMABAD, Jul 19 (APP): The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Federal Government to submit reply on a petition filed by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) regarding amendments to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) law.
A three-member SC bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah heard the case filed by former prime minister Imran Khan.
The PTI chairman, in the petition filed under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, claimed that the amended NAB law had virtually eliminated any white-collar crime committed by a public office holder.
During the course of proceedings, Chief Justice Bandial addressed Imran Khan’s counsel Khawaja Harris that he had worked hard on the petition.
The CJP quoted the law minister as saying that the new amendments were as per the rulings of the apex court. However, the PTI’s counsel rejected the notion and said the changes were made in a hurry and were against the court’s ruling.
Justice Ijaz observed that many amendments had been passed in haste.
The counsel said the court also had to take into account the United Nations Anti-Corruption Convention. Most of the cases were of abuse of power and assets in excess of income, he added.
He said no case would be made for benefiting anyone after the amendment.
Justice Mansoor asked whether legislators should not be allowed to exercise their prerogative.
Khawaja Harris raised a question that if the parliament declared that murder was not a crime, should it be allowed to happen.
Justice Mansoor asked whether the court could restore death penalty if the parliament abolished the same.
The counsel said abolition of the death penalty was a different matter. The question of fundamental rights arose when there was a matter of corruption and national exchequer. A rich man transferred the wealth wherever he wanted.
He said action was taken against a patwari if he was caught taking money from a person.
Whether action should not be taken against the wealthy person, he asked.
The chief justice said the amendment did not abolish abuse of power as an offence. The counsel should inform the court which amendments were against the fundamental rights, he added.
Justice Ijaz asked whether the legislative powers of parliament should not be subject to judicial review. Whether a law benefiting certain persons could not be challenged.
The application of the amendments since 1985 meant that all pending cases had been disposed of by default, he added.
The chief justice said the NAB law was not only related to the public office-holders. The NAB Act had created obstacles in many cases as bureaucracy in particular had been greatly affected by it, he added.
He remarked that the court could nullify laws that were enacted to benefit certain individuals; however, he stressed that hurdles should not be created in functioning of the government as public servants were hesitant to take decisions due to the NAB laws.
The court observed that anyone who committed corruption should be severally dealt with but a necessary decision taken by him should not also be set aside.
The chief justice called former foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi at the rostrum and asked him why the PTI did not object to the legislation related to amendments in the parliament.
He asked the PTI to consider participating in the assembly for the sake of people and the country. He said the functioning of the parliament was necessary for the country’s progress.
He said the parliament was the sovereign body and the parliament should be fully functional.
He observed that several issues brought to judicial bodies were the domain of the parliament. These issues should be debated in the parliament so that the court could spend time to decide litigant cases, he added.
Shah Mahmood Qureshi said two attempts were made to amend the NAB laws but consensus could not be evolved.
He said that the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz led coalition government had previously suggested 34 amendments, which were not acceptable as they could have made the accountability law completely redundant.
The court after hearing the arguments issued notices to NAB, the Federal Government, and the Attorney General for Pakistan to submit replies and adjourned the case till July 29.
