Add news
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010June 2010July 2010
August 2010
September 2010October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011March 2011April 2011May 2011June 2011July 2011August 2011September 2011October 2011November 2011December 2011January 2012February 2012March 2012April 2012May 2012June 2012July 2012August 2012September 2012October 2012November 2012December 2012January 2013February 2013March 2013April 2013May 2013June 2013July 2013August 2013September 2013October 2013November 2013December 2013January 2014February 2014March 2014April 2014May 2014June 2014July 2014August 2014September 2014October 2014November 2014December 2014January 2015February 2015March 2015April 2015May 2015June 2015July 2015August 2015September 2015October 2015November 2015December 2015January 2016February 2016March 2016April 2016May 2016June 2016July 2016August 2016September 2016October 2016November 2016December 2016January 2017February 2017March 2017April 2017May 2017June 2017July 2017August 2017September 2017October 2017November 2017December 2017January 2018February 2018March 2018April 2018May 2018June 2018July 2018August 2018September 2018October 2018November 2018December 2018January 2019February 2019March 2019April 2019May 2019June 2019July 2019August 2019September 2019October 2019November 2019December 2019January 2020February 2020March 2020April 2020May 2020June 2020July 2020August 2020September 2020October 2020November 2020December 2020January 2021February 2021
News Every Day |

Plea against Justice Azmat’s appointment dismissed

0
Plea against  Justice Azmat’s appointment dismissed

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday dismissed the petition filed against the recent appointment of retired Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed as head of the one-man commission constituted to probe the controversy related to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the UK-based asset recovery firm, Broadsheet LLC.

When IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah took up the matter, the petitioner, Saleemullah Khan, refused to argue the case saying that he did not want the IHC bench to hear the matter. He also wrote a note that the petition be fixed before Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri or Justice Babar Sattar only.

The chief justice noted that previously, in his personal cases, Mr Khan had raised unjust objections to other benches as well. This time again he requested his cases be fixed before one of the two honourable judges who had been recently elevated, the chief justice observed.

However, he said, “Neither a petitioner nor an enrolled advocate has the privilege nor can claim a right to ask for fixation of his cases before a bench of his choice. Such forum shopping, without a valid reason or justification, is not in consonance with the principles of administration of justice.”

The petitioner had challenged the appointment of the judge, who had retired from the apex court in August 2019, as head of the Broadsheet commission by the federal government in exercise of powers conferred under the Commission of Inquiry Act, 2017. In his petition, he argued that Justice Saeed had served in the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) as deputy prosecutor general and he might be privy to the agreement signed between NAB and Broadsheet, therefore, he could not be appointed as the head of the inquiry commission.

Under the rules, a retired judge could be appointed in any office for profit at least two years after his retirement, the petitioner argued, adding that Justice Saeed had retired in August 2019 and the two-year mandatory gap would not be over before August 2021. The petitioner urged the court that his recent appointment as commission head be set aside as there is a conflict of interest.

Justice Saeed was appointed as the commission head on January 21 to probe the NAB-Broadsheet issue two days after the federal cabinet had decided to form a new inquiry committee on the recommendation of an inter-ministerial committee that had earlier been constituted by Prime Minister Imran Khan to look into the Broadsheet saga.

After the petitioner raised objection to the bench and demanded that the matter be fixed before one of the two judges, Justice Minallah observed that the petitioner appeared in uniform of the noble legal profession and, therefore, he was also bound to observe the professional code of conduct. The court noted that Rule 166 of Pakistan Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1973 declared it as “the duty of advocates to appear in court when a matter is called and if it is so possible to make satisfactory alternative arrangements”.

However, the IHC order said, the “petitioner refused to argue his case and allowing forum shopping without a valid justification would amount to abuse of the process of the court.” The order further stated that the jurisdiction of the court vested under Article 199 of the Constitution was discretionary.

“The conduct of the petitioner is not reasonable nor can he be extended the privilege to insist upon fixation of his case before particular benches, without a just and valid reason.”

With this observation, the court dismissed the petition filed against the appointment of the former SC justice.

Published in Dawn, February 13th, 2021





Read also

Man ‘killed lover – then dropped her terrified son, 3, to his death in deep river to cover his tracks’

NASS engaging Ghana to amend trade laws, says lawmaker

‘Karen’ leaves nasty note on neighbour’s ripped parcel telling him to stop littering after package was STOLEN




News, articles, comments, with a minute-by-minute update, now on Today24.pro



Today24.pro — latest news 24/7. You can add your news instantly now — here
News Every Day

Using a KITE to Catch the FASTEST FISH IN THE SEA, 3 at a time!