ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has asked the PTI lawyer to be more specific regarding which amendments to the NAB law are in contravention of constitution and basic human rights.
A three-judge bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Ijazul Ahsan on Friday was hearing a petition filed by PTI Chairman Imran Khan challenging the amendments to the NAB law.
The additional attorney general told the court that the government had decided to appoint a senior lawyer to contest the case.
During the hearing, Justice Mansoor remarked that it was not the job of the court to direct the lawyer to make his petition stronger. He asked the PTI lawyer what would be the grounds of his petition if the government abolished the NAB law.
The CJP asked the lawyer to explain Namidar issue too. On which Kh Haris advocate said that freedom of judiciary and accountability of public representatives were an integral part of the constitution. He said both Islam and constitution put emphasis on accountability.
While agreeing with the lawyer, the CJP remarked that accountability was necessary for good governance. He remarked that if somebody did something illegal to give benefit to others, then it’s corruption. Corruption is basically abuse of authority and an action that incurs loss to national exchequer, the CJP said adding that if authorities were constructing a dam somewhere and some lobby started opposing it, then it’s equivalent to opposing the national asset.
Justice Mansoor asked the PTI lawyer to explain which amendments were in conflict with constitution and basic rights.
Justice Ijazul Ahsan asked the lawyer to be more specific regarding which amendments were made to give benefits to the particular accused. He asked the lawyer whether he wanted the court to ask the parliament to improve the law.
Kh Haris contended that he wanted those amendments to the NAB law to be declared null and void which were in conflict with the constitution.
Justice Mansoor wondered whether the court could restore an abolished NAB law! He said the petitioner had written that several amendments were against the basic structure of constitution. The judge asked the lawyer to inform the court which amendments were in fact against the spirit of constitution.
Chief Justice Bandial also inquired which amendments were affecting the NAB law and NAB cases. He remarked that Article 4 was very important but it had never been debated.
Justice Mansoor said that the amended National Accountability Ordinance was already sub judice in the Islamabad High Court suggesting that it’s better if the high court decided the case first.