NAB amendments: Discuss public issues in parliament, says SC

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday impressed upon the political figures of all parties to discuss public issues on the floor of parliament instead of involving the judiciary and observed that functioning of parliament was necessary for the progress of the country.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsen and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, heard the petition filed by former prime minister and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan challenging the government amendments made to the anti-graft body (NAB).

The court adjourned the hearing till July 29 without passing an interim order in the matter after Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman submitted before the court that without hearing the Attorney General and other parties, the court should not issue an interim order.

Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial said that they wanted to make the petitions filed in the accountability courts seeking relief under the government’s amendments made to the anti-graft body, subject to the decision of the apex court.

The Additional Attorney General, however, recalled that the apex court had also issued an interim order in the NRO case. However, it was later called back. Hence, he submitted that the court should not issue an interim order in the instant matter till hearing the arguments of the Attorney General.

The court issued notices to the federal government, attorney general as well as National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for July 29. During the course of hearing, Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial called former foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi who was present in the courtroom to the rostrum and asked him why his party did not raise objections to the NAB law amendments in the parliament.

“Instead of approaching the court, why you avoided attending the parliament’s proceedings on this important issue,” the CJP asked Qureshi. “Just think about it that you avoided the parliament’s proceedings when amendments in the NAB law were approved,” the Chief Justice further told the former foreign minister.

The Chief Justice observed that the court had already held that parliament is the sovereign body, hence it should remain functional for taking better decisions for the welfare of people and the country. “The functioning of parliament is very much necessary for the country, its people as well as for smooth functioning of democracy,” the CJP remarked.

The Chief Justice asked the former foreign minister to concentrate on attending the parliament’s proceedings for the sake of country and for democracy. “Why your party did not debate the issue in parliament”, the CJP asked Qureshi adding that there were some conditions for debate because of which the party avoided to attend the proceedings.

“If your presence is not there, then the trust of people who choose their public representatives will be no more as your counsel extensively mentioned in the petition,” Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, another member of the bench, told Qurashi.

Justice Ijazul Ahsen, another member of bench, while addressing Qureshi, asked as to why they did not discuss the issue on the floor of parliament adding that none of their members said no to the amendment. “You left your people alone who voted for you to represent them in the parliament,” Justice Ahsen told Qureshi.

Shah Mahmood Qureshi, however, submitted that they were out of the parliament for some reasons adding that when they looked at the law, there were some serious issues and, therefore, sought the indulgence of the court. “You were aware of the issues but despite that you left the parliament,” Justice Mansoor Ali Shah told Qureshi.

Justice Ijazul Ahsen observed that token restraint was shown by the president on the issue and after that the joint session of the Parliament passed the amendments in the law. Qureshi submitted that he was a member of the committee discussing the amendments in the law.

“Consider it for the sake of people and for sanctity of Parliament as one hand can’t clap”, Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial told Qureshi. The Chief Justice observed that these issues should be debated in the parliament so that the court may spend time to decide and concentrate on other cases filed by litigants.

Shah Mahmood Qureshi, however, submitted that he was a member of the committee adding that two attempts were made to amend the NAB laws but consensus could not be evolved. The former foreign minister further told the court that the PML-N-led coalition government had previously suggested 34 amendments, which were not acceptable as they could have made the accountability law completely redundant.

“We leave the question to you and you can better answer as to why this issue was not debated on the floor of parliament,” the Chief Justice asked Qureshi. He said that in his personal view the matter should be referred back to parliament as there was no substitute to parliament.

“The currency is stumbling day by day, therefore, it is the right of the people that their chosen representatives should not misuse their authority,” the CJP remarked. “It is time to show responsibility and we will ask the other side that this should be left for the parliament”, the Chief Justice added.

Earlier, at the start of the hearing, the Chief Justice asked Khwaja Haris, counsel for PTI, if he had worked hard for drafting the instant petition. Khwaja Haris replied that the respondent (government) had also made hard work for amending the NAB Ordinance.

The learned counsel submitted that the parliamentary system and Islamic provisions are features of the Constitution and these amendments affected these features. The recent amendments are violative of that salient features of the Constitution, hence it must be struck down adding that in the West legal system, human dignity related to rights of the people.

At this, Chief Justice said dignity is absolute in our Constitution. Khwaja Haris submitted that under the new amendments, material obtained through Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) could not be placed as evidence before an accountability court. He said that the amendment was created to benefit those accused involved in fake account cases.

He further submitted that it was the basic aspect of NAB law that one has to answer over the issue of assets beyond means as well for misuse of authority. However, he contended that under the new amendments made to the law, no case could be filed in the matter pertaining to such allegations.

He further submitted that parliamentary democracy involves a sacred trust and in breach of trust people have the right to make their representatives accountable. The Chief Justice observed that the court can strike down the law that was made person-specific adding that the government business should move on and there must be legislation for the benefit of the people and country. He observed that the NAB law has intervened in many matters, particularly in civil servants matters. The chief justice further observed that Article 10-A provides due process of law.

Khwaja Haris submitted that the implementation of law is necessary adding that if the law is not implemented in letter and spirit, the fundamental rights of the people are affected. Khwaja Haris further contended that under the new amendments made in the NAB law, cases filed pertaining to fake accounts will be no more. At this, the Chief Justice said that the points raised by the counsel in the petition and before the court deserve consideration and issued notices to the respondents and adjourned the matter till July 29.