Justice Faez Isa case: Decision good, govt satisfied

ISLAMABAD: Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on Accountability Shahzad Akbar on Friday said the government was satisfied and accepted the Supreme Court judgment in Justice Faez Isa reference case.

He was speaking at a hurriedly called news conference, here after the 10-member full court bench quashed the presidential reference against Justice Isa.

Minister for Information and Broadcasting Senator Shibli Faraz accompanied him. He said the decision was good and termed it sensitive issue. He said it was neither anyone's victory nor defeat. He also maintained that as of now there was no plan to file a petition against the verdict.

Shahzad Akbar contended that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, its Chairman Imran Khan and he himself as an advocate had great respect for the superior judiciary and respected its independence.

He said the PTI believed in separation of the judiciary, the executive and Parliament, as was envisaged in the Constitution of Pakistan. He highlighted that under Article 209, there were three ways a reference could be filed against a judge.

The first is that the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) takes notice by itself against a judge. Secondly, the government files a reference with the SJC and thirdly any person approaches the council for action.

Shahzad Akbar said the proceedings of the petition against the presidential reference filed under Article 209 of the Constitution continued for 13 months. He said there was mechanism of accountability of every

institution and the superior judiciary was only answerable to the Supreme Judicial Council comprising five senior most judges of the superior judiciary.

He said as it was known that the reference was about three flats owned by the wife and children of the honourable judge, which had been challenged by the petitioner. Shahzad Akbar noted that as per short order, the judges of the bench declared the proceedings of the Supreme Judicial Council and its show-cause notice as abate.

As per the SC verdict, within seven days, inland commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Revenue (FBR) would issue notices to the spouse and children of the honourable SC judge who were owners of the flats.

Within 75 days, the commissioner would furnish a report in the light of documents, money trial and other material and surely there would be questions and answers and more documents could be sought and then he would send, within seven says, the report to the FBR chairman, who would be bound to send it to the SJC chairman with his signatures, the chief justice of Pakistan, through the secretary i.e. the registrar. This report would not be sent to the government or ARU.

The chairman would then place the report before the council under the rules defined as per Article 209 of the Constitution and it would hold deliberations thereon for perusal, consideration, action or order or proceedings, if any, he noted.

Shahzad Akbar said it was clearly written also that the FBR proceedings would have nothing do with the council proceedings and on the basis of its report, the council would decide on whether or not to take further action and in this scheme of things, the petition had been accepted.

Quoting from the short order, he said the government was satisfied with the judgment and it was a good judgment. He said the dispatch of government reference to the Supreme Judicial Council did not at all construe that the government would look for a particular decision, as its duty as per the Constitution was to refer information and the honourable judges had to then see it, having nothing to do with the government afterwards.

He said the scheme of things set as per the order was quite proper and whatever would be the next decision, the government duty was over already, as now the matter was between the SJC and the judge concerned.

He said the government lawyers were quite mindful of not taking anything, which might lead to creating any controversy. “We did what was our constitutional right and then the honourable judges had to hold proceedings and they are extremely respectable to us. However, as soon as the short order came, an environment was created, as if it was someone’s victory and someone’s defeat. In democratic societies and constitutional schemes, giving such colour to a judgment is not proper,” he maintained.

Shahzad said he had gone through the order repeatedly but he could not find the name of Asset Recovery Unit or its abbreviation in it or it had been declared illegal. He said the detailed judgment would also be guidance to the government and serve as beacon light in future.

Shahzad Akbar said the prime minister had no problem with the matter being referred to the FBR while timeline had also been given on this count. Shibli said the press conference was being held to give the government stance after the court verdict. However, they both requested the media not to ask questions in view of the sensitivity of the matter.

Meanwhile, talking to a private TV channel, government’s prosecutor Barrister Farogh Naseem claimed that he had probably won the case, adding that it was not the case to win or lose as the media was discussing it.

Farogh Naseem said the government stood on three grounds; first) the Supreme Judicial Council would take action itself; second) the SJC would take action on presidential reference; and third) the SJC would take sou motu on the issue and provide information regarding the case.

Naseem said we pleaded the Supreme Court to use any of the options for the required information and the SC adopted third option. When the apex court ordered FBR to take over the case due to its sensitivity and investigate the wife of Justice Faez Essa, and we agreed on the term, while the petitioner pleaded not to hand over the case to the FBR.

The government’s prosecutor said it was neither win nor lose but it has to be ensured that everyone should be held accountable in front of the law, adding that no one including the federal government had any personal grievances against Justice Faez Isa. He said the government wanted him to hand over information of the money trail if he possessed. He said if Justice Faez Isa had the money trail then the government would have no issue, adding that the FBR would issue notices to the wife and children of the judge.

Farogh Naseem said the process of continuous accountability of every individual is our victory not the sentences or awards. He said FBR’s investigation would be sent to the SJC and it would examine whether the money trail was provided or not. He said further action would be taken by the SJC through its suo motu powers.

Barrister Naseem said today is a great day for Pakistan’s judicial system as the court had freely declared that no one, including the SC’s justice, was above the law or accountability. He said whatever Zarina Isa had mentioned, she had to provide all information to the FBR and it would be FBR and the SJC to decide the authenticity. The lawyer said he knew the positive and negative aspects but would not comment on it.

Naseem said he saluted all the seven Supreme Court’s justices for giving such a historical decision to continue the process of accountability even under the ambit of apex court. He said although it was still to know, on which ground the reference was declared null and void and the Supreme Judicial Council took the sou motu in the case. He said all three properties were endorsed by the owners and now means of the funding are to be disclosed and how the money was transferred to England from Pakistan.

Barrister Naseem said these two issues have to be answered by Justice Faez Isa’s family and he wished that they had the money trail so that the case is dismissed. He said if the money trail is not found the FBR would submit its report to the SJC, and it would be the SJC’s prerogative to take action against the judge or not. He said if the FBR would submit report against the justice’s family, they would also have an option to appeal.