No proof of interference in NAB: IHC dismisses plea against Shehzad Akbar’s appointment

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Wednesday disposed of a petition against the appointment of Shehzad Akbar as Adviser to Prime Minister on Accountability and declared it “non-maintainable”.

IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah announced the verdict reserved earlier on the petition moved by Advocate Syed Pervaiz Zahoor.

The court in its nine-page judgment said that the petitioner failed to provide any record regarding Shehzad Akbar’s interference in National Accountability Bureau (NAB). During hearing, Advocate Amanullah Kanrani appeared before the court on behalf of petitioner Pervez Zahoor and argued on the ground of a judgment of Sindh High Court that accountability under the rules of business was an independent procedure and was not subordinate to anyone.

To this, Justice Athar Minallah remarked that the prime minister has constitutional power to appoint anyone as his adviser. He further added that there was no merit for the appointment of the adviser to prime minister.

Justice Minallah remarked that the adviser to PM can participate in the parliamentary proceedings but cannot vote and expressed hope that Shahzad Akbar as being adviser to PM would perform his duties under the law and the Constitution and would fulfill all his responsibilities.

The court verdict further states that the petitioner has not placed on record any material in support of his contention that Shahzad Akbar may have interfered with the matters, which exclusively fall within the domain of the Bureau under the Ordinance of 1999 or the Agency under the Act of 1973.

“There is also nothing on record to indicate that the rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced by an act of the respondent so as to treat him as an aggrieved person for the purpose of Article 199 of the Constitution.”

The verdict, however, said that the top court’s decision over Asset Recovery Unit (ARU) against Shahzad Akbar was yet to come.

The court disposed of the petition holding that it was not maintainable as the PM had constitutional powers to appoint anyone he deemed fit as his adviser.