LAHORE: An inquiry that resulted in removal from service of an accountability court judge Arshad Malik on charges of misconduct held that the judicial officer was unable to establish that he acted under “duress or intimidation”, caused by sympathisers of Nawaz Sharif.
He had convicted the former prime minister in one of the two NAB references in the federal capital.
The 13-page inquiry report, also available with The News, says, “There appears to have been no evidence that the accused-officer went in fear of death or serious bodily injury, nor was any attempt made to show that the accused-officer could not escape from the persons concerned.”
Justice Sardar Ahmad Naeem of Lahore High Court had held the inquiry, as assigned by the LHC administrative committee.
The inquiry judge had recommended imposition of major penalty on district & sessions judge Arshad Malik, who, during his posting as presiding judge of an Islamabad accountability court, convicted Nawaz Sharif in Al-Azizia reference and handed down seven-year jail term to him. He had acquitted the former premier in Flagship reference.
The LHC administrative committee, in its July 3 meeting, approved the removal of the judge from service in the light of the inquiry report.
“The accused-officer led no evidence in rebuttal that whatever done by him was a result of intimidation or duress,” it holds, adding that the judicial officer took inconsistent pleas as, in his press statement, he claimed to have been blackmailed. But, on the other hand, he claimed that the decision of the references was free from any influence, coercion or threats.
The plea of duress is based on blackmailing on account of objectionable video film of the judge and serious threats extended by Nasir Butt etc., as highlighted by his affidavit and the written defence, but the judge never communicated to the authority for such blackmailing or intimidation, either orally or in black and white, adds the report.
It further says, “The accused has not established through some evidence that he was so terrorised that he acted entirely against his will. It means he admits that he has committed the crime, but prays to be excused from the punishment for the consequences of crime by the reason of duress.
“Also, the evidence seemed to show that the accused-officer had voluntarily joined criminal organisation, knowing of its business and one who does this has no cause for complaint if he is debarred from the defence of duress.
“Had there been a per chance single meeting of the accused officer with any of the persons mentioned above, the position could have been different. But meetings/ visits of the accused at different places and at different times that, too, during the pendency of the above references and after decision of the cases, do not indicate that those meetings were result of intimidations, coercion or duress, rather reflect upon his willingness,” the report added.
The inquiry report says that the record established that the acquaintance of the judge and his frequent meetings with individuals including Mehar Nasir, Nasir Janjua and Nasir Butt (the alleged sympathisers of Nawaz Sharif) were always with certain demands concerning the accountability references. The record proved that the judge was always accessible to them.
This is also a fact that the judge, even after the decision on the references, visited Jati Umra and met Nawaz Sharif as well as his son Hussain Nawaz when the judge had gone to perform Umrah. As per the judge’s written defence, Nasir Butt met him for preparation of grounds of an appeal against the sentence in Al-Azizia reference.
The accused reviewed the grounds of appeal to be filed against the judgment, rendered by himself.