Connect with us

Politics

Disappointed IHC directs Imran Khan to resubmit response in contempt of court case in 7 days

Published

on

  • IHC CJ says leaders like Imran Khan should think before speaking.
  • Court gives Khan one week to submit “well-considered” response”.
  • IHC adjourns contempt of court proceedings till September 8.

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) directed on Wednesday PTI Chairman Imran to resubmit a “well-considered” response within the next seven days in the contempt of court case against him for threatening a female judge.

A five-member bench comprising IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, and Justice Babar Sattar heard the case.

In response to the IHC’s show-cause notice in the case, the PTI chairman did not apologise for threatening additional sessions judge of Islamabad, Zeba Chaudhry, offering, however, to withdraw his remarks “if they were inappropriate.”

The IHC CJ, during the hearing, said he was “disappointed” by the response of Khan in the case. He asked him to review his response and submit it once more.

Without asking Khan to come to the rostrum, the court adjourned the hearing and ordered that the response can be submitted through the PTI chairman’s counsel.

Today’s hearing

At the outset of the hearing, Khan’s lawyer Hamid Khan came forward and took the stand. IHC CJ Minallah told him that although he was Khan’s lawyer, he was also there to assist the court.

“I did not expect this from you,” the IHC CJ said in response to the reply that the lawyer submitted on behalf of Khan.

IHC CJ Minallah noted that a political party should always believe in upholding the law and the constitution. “In the last 70 years, a common man has not been able to make it to the high courts and the Supreme Court.”

The IHC CJ said that he was “disappointed” by the response that Khan submitted in response to the show-cause notice.

“The response that was submitted was not of the stature of a political leader like Khan.”

Justice Minallah said that he hoped that the PTI chairman would boost the court’s confidence, however, it should be noted that just like “the time that has passed by cannot come back, the words uttered through one’s tongue cannot be taken back”.

The court said that Khan is a popular leader and has a massive following, therefore, he should think before he speaks.

“I was expecting that he [Khan] might come to terms with the fact that he has done something wrong. A political leader has several followers, they should think before they speak.”

“Through your response, I feel that Imran Khan has not understood that he has done anything wrong,” the IHC CJ told the PTI chairman’s lawyer.

In the last three years — during PTI’s tenure — the IHC has raised the issue of torture without any fear, noting that the state has encouraged torture in the last 70 years.

“Torture, at any level, cannot be allowed. Is there a worse form of torture than making someone disappear?” the court asked, as the PTI keeps claiming that party leader Shahbaz Gill was tortured by the police.

Taking forward the PTI’s claims, Khan had earlier this month went on to criticise the additional district and sessions judge for rejecting his bail plea of Gill.

Justice Minallah asked who had control of Adiala Jail — where Gill was imprisoned for a few days. “If there’s even a small complaint of torture, then can the jail authorities imprison a person without medical examination?”

The IHC CJ went on to say that the PTI should look at the cases of journalists Asad Toor and Absar Alam. He added that during the last three years, the IHC sent such matters to the PTI’s federal cabinet.

“I wish they had raised their voice in this regard then.”

‘Courts never care about criticism’

During the proceedings, Islamabad Advocate-General Jahangir Jadoon tried to speak but was stopped. “This matter is between the person who has allegedly committed contempt of court and the court.”

The IHC CJ then asked when the high court wrapped up the case of the alleged torture of Gill and when the speech was made. At this, Khan’s counsel said that the court concluded the case on August 22 and the PTI chairman delivered the speech on August 20.

“The matter was already pending in the IHC while he made the speech. You should read Firdous Ashiq Awan’s judgement. Under PECA ordinance, the person speaking against institutions will not even get bail for six months.”

This court, IHC CJ said, nullified the PECA ordinance and then a smear campaign was started against it. “However, the courts never care about criticism.”

Moving on, Justice Minallah said that Khan keeps asking why the courts were opened at 12am — during the National Assembly’s vote of no-confidence against the ex-premier in April.

“This court will remain open for the weak 24/7. However, the courts do not need to justify before anyone as to why they open and when.”

Clear message against Oct 12, 1999

“The case of contempt of court is very serious,” he said, noting that the courts opening at 12am was a very clear message that they did not want the repetition of October 12, 1999 — the day when former dictator Gen Pervez Musharraf imposed martial law.

The IHC CJ then said that political leaders are misusing social media as photos of him and a judge of the Supreme Court were made viral and they were termed leaders of a political party.

“Wrong information was shared regarding a flat registered against my name in a foreign country,” he said, adding that his institution has also committed several mistakes.

The IHC CJ said that political parties do not prohibit their followers from uploading such posts. “If a leader tells their workers to stop, this will indeed stop.”

In response, Khan’s counsel asked whether he could speak.

The lawyer said that he was aware that the court was disappointed by the response, but noted that the petition raised general legal points.

“However, I do not want to raise them now.”

‘Matter very serious’

The IHC CJ then said that this was an open court and everything happening over here is transparent and that he would not allow contempt of court proceedings to be misused.

The court then said that this case also includes the matter pertaining to freedom of speech.

The lawyer then argued that he has also raised the point of dismissing the case as Khan had no intention of saying something like that against the judge.

The court then noted that the matter of Gill’s torture was already being heard at the IHC. “Check the record, then submit your response again, otherwise this court will take the matter forward.”

“This matter is very serious, the contempt of court proceedings could have ended today, but they aren’t due to the response that was submitted.”

‘Court cannot go against the verdicts of SC’

During the course of proceedings, Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb remarked that Imran Khan has been given another chance to submit a reply to the show-cause notice.

“This court cannot go against the verdicts of the Supreme Court,” remarked Justice Minallah and advised Khan’s counsel to understand the seriousness of the matter and submit a reply carefully.

“Change will come in this country only when all institutions do their work according to the constitution,” noted the IHC CJ.

At this, Hamid Khan said that his client had no intention to say this about the judicial officer.

Justice Minallah said that the only concern of this court is the independence of the judiciary and directed the lawyer to read out three verdicts of the SC in this regard.

Meanwhile, the court ordered Imran Khan to submit his reply to the show-cause notice within seven days again.

During the proceedings, Khan’s counsel suggested appointing Munir A Malik as a judicial assistant. Replying to the lawyer, the CJ said that the nation is divided and asked him to name a person with such a reputation that he is acceptable to everyone. The attorney general, however, suggested the name of Makhdoom Ali Khan.

Justice Minallah also directed the representative of the federal government to review the sedition and treason cases.

The proceedings could have been concluded today but they will have to continue the proceedings after this reply, remarked Justice Aurangzeb.

“You accuse us that Pakistan’s judiciary ranks 130th in the world,” Justice Minallah said, adding that they had told Fawad Chaudhry in a case that the number was of the executive.

Meanwhile, the IHC adjourned the hearing till September 8.

Khan offers to take back remarks against judge

A day earlier, Khan had petitioned the high court praying that the terrorism case against him be quashed and offered to take back his words against a district and sessions judge.

The PTI chairman did not apologise for threatening additional sessions judge of Islamabad, offering, however, to withdraw his remarks “if they were inappropriate.”

“As someone who believes in rule of law and a strong independent justice system, the respondent does not believe in hurting the feelings of honorable judges.

“The respondent submits with humility that if words he uttered is regarded as inappropriate, he is willing to take them back,” he said, urging the court to evaluate the speech within the context it was made.

Khan added that his remarks against the additional sessions judge were not obstruction of justice, nor were they intended to undermine the integrity and credibility of the judicial system.

The case

On August 23, a larger bench of the IHC issued a show-cause notice to Khan after taking up contempt of court proceedings against him for threatening additional sessions judge during a public rally.

The bench comprised Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Babar Sattar and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb.

The court summoned Khan in personal capacity on August 31, and forwarded the case to the Chief Justice of Pakistan, seeking the inclusion of more judges on the bench.

The PTI chair had staged a rally in the federal capital on August 20 to express solidarity with his chief of staff Shahbaz Gill after claims of torture inflicted on him in custody. He warned the Islamabad inspector-general and deputy inspector-general that he would “not spare” them, vowing to file cases against them for subjecting Gill to alleged inhuman torture.

Turning his guns towards the additional sessions judge, who sent Gill into physical remand on the police’s request, Khan then said she [the judge] should brace herself for consequences.

‘Judge should’ve been charged for insulting Khan’

In response, PML-N Vice President Maryam Nawaz sarcastically remarked that the female judge should be charged with contempt of court.

“The female judge should be charged with contempt of court as she insulted Imran Khan,” she said in a sarcastic tweet.

Politics

Political bigwigs to face accountability as NAB submits records to court

Published

on

By

ISLAMABAD: In line with the Supreme Court’s order to restore graft cases against public office holders, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) submitted a record of corruption references to an accountability court in Islamabad.

Accountability Judge Muhammad Bashir directed the registrar of the court to review the cases’ records and present them before him.

The judge directed the NAB prosecutors to review the legal aspects of the cases as the nature of cases against private individuals, public office holders, and government employees is different.

The development came as NAB prosecutors Sohail Arif and Sardar Muzaffar appeared in the accountability court to brief the judge on the reopening of the cases.

“You [prosecutours] have to tell which case can be heard and which is not in a [court’s] jurisdiction, Judge Bashir stated.

NAB prosecutor Abbasi assured the judge that the anti-graft watchdog will ensure the implementation of the apex court order and submit all relevant records to the court.

On September 15, a three-member bench of the apex in a majority 2-1 verdict approved Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan’s petition challenging amendments made to the country’s accountability laws during the tenure of the previous Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM)-led government.

The then-chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial-led bench ordered restoring all graft cases that were closed against the political leaders and public office holders and declared the amendments void.

In this regard, the anti-corruption watchdog wrote a letter to the registrar of an accountability court in the federal capital in line with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Last week, NAB Chairman Lt-Gen (retd) Nazir Ahmed Butt summoned a consultative meeting to formulate the future course of action.

The cases will be reopened against former prime ministers Nawaz Sharif, Yousuf Raza Gillani, Raja Pervez Ashraf, Shehbaz Sharif, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, former president Asif Ali Zardari, former chief ministers of Sindh, Punjab as well as dozens of former federal and provincial ministers, according to The News.

Sources said the fake accounts cases against Zardari and the rental power plants case against Ashraf have also been reopened. They added that the Toshakhana vehicles cases against Zardari, Nawaz and Gillani would also be investigated again.

Other politicians who would face cases include former chief minister Sindh Murad Ali Shah, former finance minister Miftah Ismail and former finance minister Senator Ishaq Dar for amassing assets beyond known sources of income. 

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Culprits Bajwa, Faiz’ should be held accountable for causing instability: Sanaullah

Published

on

By

  • “They are culprits of Pakistan,” says former interior minister.
  • Sanaullah says Bajwa, Faiz should be brought to justice for causing instability.
  • PML-N to address problems of common man on priority, he adds. 

KARACHI: Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader and former interior minister Rana Sanaullah has held former army chief Gen (retd) Qamar Javed Bajwa and former Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Faiz Hamid responsible for prevailing political and economic crises in the country.

In an interview with a local TV channel on Wednesday, Sanaullah called the former top military officials “culprits of the nation”, demanding that they should be brought to justice for causing political and economic instability in the country, The News reported.

In response to a question, Sanaullah said: “These people are culprits of the nation. They are the culprits of Pakistan. They are culprits of not just the PML-N but also of the entire nation.”

“They will not be forgiven. These people must be held accountable. They are responsible for the current instability in the country and they must be asked why they created instability in 2017,” he added. 

Answering another question what action PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif would propose if his party came to power against Gen Bajwa, Gen Hamid, former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Saqib Nisar and a sitting senior Supreme Court judge whom he named while addressing his party’s Punjab Tanzeemi Committee meeting via video link on Tuesday or it was only a statement, Sanaullah said these people were responsible for citizens starving in the country because they brought about political instability, which in turn led to economic instability.

When asked what the PML-N’s plan was for “these national culprits”, he said his party would not rush towards revenge. In his address, he said, Sharif made it clear that first the injured person in need of urgent medical attention must be attended and then action should be taken against the culprits.

“If the PML-N gets an opportunity to come to power, first of all, our priority would be to address the problems of the common man, and later those responsible for their plight, in my opinion as the decision would be made by the party, should be booked in a case.”

Sanaullah further said that these culprits should be brought to justice just the way Pervez Musharraf was brought to the dock and the credit for that must be given to the PML-N.

To another query, if action would also be taken against the sitting SC judge named by Nawaz Sharif, he said, “Yes, [he] should be accountable…. Yesterday, Nawaz Sharif’s statement was a policy statement and he said these people should be held accountable.”

Continue Reading

Politics

NAB moves to reopen graft cases against political bigwigs after SC order

Published

on

By

  • NAB writes letter to registrar of accountability court
  • NAB likely to submit record of cases to court in next two days. 
  • Regional offices of anti-corruption watchdog compile data on cases. 

ISLAMABAD: After the Supreme Court’s verdict to strike down the amendments made to the anti-graft law, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) decided in principle to reopen corruption cases against political bigwigs, The News reported Thursday. 

On September 15, a three-member bench of the apex in a majority 2-1 verdict approved Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan’s petition challenging amendments made to the country’s accountability laws during the tenure of the previous Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM)-led government.

The then-chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial-led bench ordered restoring all graft cases worth less than Rs500 million that were closed against the political leaders and public office holders and declared the amendments void. 

In this regard, the anti-corruption watchdog wrote a letter to the registrar of an accountability court in the federal capital in line with the Supreme Court’s ruling. 

Last week, NAB Chairman Lt-Gen (retd) Nazir Ahmed Butt summoned a consultative meeting to formulate the future course of action. 

NAB is likely to submit the record of all cases to the court in the next two days for resuming hearing. The cases will be reopened against former prime ministers Nawaz Sharif, Yousuf Raza Gillani, Raja Pervez Ashraf, Shehbaz Sharif, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, former president Asif Ali Zardari, former chief ministers of Sindh, Punjab as well as dozens of former federal and provincial ministers.

Sources said NAB was still continuing legal examination of cases that were closed earlier, and compiling records of cases that were at the stages of complaint verification, inquiries and investigations. 

Regional offices of NAB in Rawalpindi, Lahore, Multan, Sukkur, Karachi, Peshawar, and Quetta are compiling complete data of cases that would be submitted to the accountability courts, said sources. “NAB will fulfil its obligation once the legal consultation is finalised in the light of the Supreme Court decision in the NAB amendments case.”

Sources said the fake accounts cases against Zardari and the rental power plants case against Ashraf have also been reopened. They added that the Toshakhana vehicles cases against Zardari, Nawaz and Gillani would also be investigated again.

Other politicians who would face cases include former chief minister Sindh Murad Ali Shah, former finance minister Miftah Ismail and former finance minister Senator Ishaq Dar for amassing assets beyond known sources of income. 

NAB amendments

The NAB amendments not only reduced the four-year term of the NAB chairman and the bureau’s prosecutor general to three years but also placed all regulatory bodies functioning in the country out of NAB’s domain.

Furthermore, the changes included that a three-year term be set for the judges of the accountability courts and that courts be bound to decide a case within one year.

Challenging the amendments, Imran Khan approached the apex court and petitioned that the amendments be struck down on the grounds that they were unconstitutional.

The petition argued that amendments to sections 2, 4, 5, 6, 25 and 26 of the NAB law are against the Constitution, along with amendments made to sections 14, 15, 21 and 23.

Furthermore, the PTI chief argued that amendments in the NAB law are contrary to the fundamental rights of Articles 9, 14, 19, 24, and 25.

All these amendments made in the NAB law should be declared null and void, the PTI Chairman had requested.

To hear Khan’s plea, a special three-member bench was formed on July 15, 2022. The first hearing of the case against the NAB amendments was held on July 19 last year after Khan’s lawyer Khawaja Haris filed an application 184/3 against the NAB amendments.

Both the federation and NAB were made parties in the petition.

Continue Reading

Trending