ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court of Pakistan Thursday reserved its judgment on the federal government’s intra-court appeal against SC judgment regarding amendments in National Accountability Ordinance.
A five-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa conducted hearing of the ICA and the petitions of some individuals, whose applications have been pending before the Islamabad High Court (IHC). The bench has directed the lawyers to file the concise synopsis within one week. NAB was directed to again file the report on the expenditure, budget and the recoveries made in the last years.
The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) founder, who appeared before the court through video link from the Adiala Jail Rawalpindi, also presented his arguments.
At the conclusion of Khawaja Haris arguments, the bench took half-an-hour break. When the court assembled again, the Chief Justice asked Imran Khan, can you hear us, and want to add something to the submission made by Kh Haris.
Imran regretted over the Supreme Court judgment on live-streaming of NAB amendments case, saying; “I was hurt with the judgment,” adding that “Am I sort of irresponsible character.”
The Chief Justice told that they have passed the order as in the last hearing you instead of explaining why you oppose the amendments, you started speaking about other things.” He added that let hear your case.
Imran then questioned that who is NAB head and how they have been running the institution. Is he performing his work with honesty. In Toshakhana case I had been sentenced 14-year imprisonment.
Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan interrupted him and said that leave aside the legislation or who is NAB head, and just focus on the case, as other issues are not relevant. Upon that Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel told Imran that why not the politicians could themselves decide who should be the chairman, and how he should be selected need to be decided by the Parliament.
Imran Khan said the Supreme Court should appoint the NAB chairman. He remarked that how the Parliament can decide it because when the opposition says this man should be appointed then ruling party disagree with it, therefore the third force should decide about it. He apprised that from 2000 – 2017 the NAB recovered Rs294 billion, and from 2018 – 2021 it recovered Rs426 billion, while in 2024 the NAB has recovered Rs10 million.
Justice Jamal remarked that the reason for it could be that the case of NAB amendments was pending before the Supreme Court. NAB might be waiting for its final decision, he added.
Imran then talked about rule of law and accountability system in the country, saying that they have list that the parliamentarians who have passed the amendments did it for their own benefits. Justice Jamal told that they agree with him, but what the Parliament does is not their job.
Imran then mentioned that Form 45 government is not capable. Justice Athar Minallah interrupted him and said that during his 3.6 years who was controlling the NAB, adding that we all should know the reality. There is no ground in the petition against NAB amendments, which could be struck down. He further said there were judgments on the working of NAB, how the fundamental rights were violated by NAB.
The ex-PM stated that Pakistan has inherited democratic system from British parliament. He again then maintained that they have list who benefited from these amendments in National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.
Justice Athar stated that the court is not wrapping up the cases before Accountability Court, but those would go to other courts set up under different laws.
Justice Jamal remarked that the politicians become more mature and experience when they go to the jails, as they understand the issue with different perspective. He said that whatever is happening within him is not right. Imran responded that he has been struggling for the last 28 years. People are taking money out of the country, adding that $700 billion are lying in foreign banks. The NAB job is to arrest such people and hold them accountable.
Justice Jamal then questioned is it Parliament’s job to bring improvement in NAB law and agree with him that the corruption should be eliminated. Imran submitted that NAB is a specialised institution it should not be abolished.
Justice Minallah reminded him that when he was judge of Islamabad High Court the PTI had challenged the appointment of Chief Election Commissioner and the ECP members. I have declared that the appointment of CEC and ECP members have been made in accordance with the constitutional scheme, and if the petitioner wanted to change then it is function of Parliament.
APP adds: The CJP observed that why Khawaja Haris’s client continued to give tax amnesty when he had such a strict stance on accountability. There was no tax amnesty in Britain, which had been a democracy for years. He noted that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) sought statements of assets (of legislators), questioning as to why the details of income tax were not asked.
He asked the lawyer that he would have to inform the court what was unconstitutional in the amendments. The chief justice said that Makhdoom Ali Khan, counsel for Federal Government, had submitted the details mentioning that the then government had amended the NAB law in 2019. He observed the amendments according to the PTI founder’s lawyer were wrong as the same were carried out by the then government in 2019, and the same would be right if done by the PTI government. Earlier, Farouk H Naek said that he would file the written arguments.
After hearing the arguments, the bench, subsequently, reserved its judgment.
