Court Rejects PTI Petition, Highlights Imran Khan’s Role in NAB Law Amendments
Delays Noted in Hearings of the Practice and Procedure Act
The Supreme Court has issued a detailed 16-page written judgment concerning the government’s appeal against the annulment of amendments to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) law.
Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa authored the ruling, which overturns a previous decision by a two-member bench and reinstates the amendments to the NAB law.
The judgment reviews the history of the NAB law, noting that it was established by former army chief General Pervez Musharraf just 34 days after he seized power through a military coup. The court criticized Musharraf for dismantling the constitutional democratic framework and using the NAB law to further his political goals.
PTI Challenges Controversial Election Bill in Supreme Court
It was highlighted that Musharraf had removed Supreme Court judges who opposed his unconstitutional measures.
Justice Athar Minallah provided an additional note agreeing with Chief Justice Isa’s ruling. He emphasized that the government’s appeal was not admissible under the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act, which permits appeals from aggrieved parties. Justice Minallah declared the previous decision invalid and emphasized that no exemptions from NAB laws should be granted to judges or military officials.
The Supreme Court reiterated the distinct roles of the judiciary and the legislature, cautioning against interference between the two branches. It reminded both to perform their duties as outlined by the Constitution and noted that the judiciary, including the Chief Justice, is not responsible for overseeing parliamentary decisions.
The court also observed that, while the NAB law’s original intent was to combat corruption, it had been misused for political retaliation and manipulation. Politicians who supported Musharraf were often acquitted, undermining the law’s intended purpose.
PTI Urges Supreme Court to Enforce Ruling on Reserved Seats
The judgment emphasized that the primary aim of the NAB law had been to pursue political revenge and manipulate political outcomes. It highlighted that three major amendments had been made to the NAB law:
– The first amendment was enacted on June 22, 2022.
– The second amendment was introduced on August 22, 2022.
– The third amendment was passed on May 29, 2023, while the court had already conducted six hearings on the case concerning these amendments.
The court chose not to delve deeply into the third amendment but underscored the importance of maintaining legislative integrity rather than swiftly invalidating laws. It also noted that if a law is open to multiple interpretations, the one that supports the law’s validity should prevail.
The verdict criticized the PTI founder’s petition and the previous Supreme Court ruling as being unconstitutional. It concluded that the court could not be persuaded of the amendments’ unconstitutionality in the current case.
IHC’s Audio Leaks Case Proceedings Stopped by Supreme Court
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by the PTI founder, ruling that it was not made in good faith. The court noted that several of the amendments in question had been introduced by Imran Khan himself.
It pointed out that the Practice and Procedure Act was enacted five months prior to the decision on the NAB law amendments. At that time, the Supreme Court had rejected a request to establish a five-member bench for the case against the amendments. The court noted Justice Mansoor Ali Shah’s suggestion for a five-member bench, and stated that had Justice Shah recused himself, the two-member bench would not have been sufficient to hear or decide the petition regarding the NAB amendments.
The court also mentioned that there was a 100-day delay in the hearings related to the Practice and Procedure Act, which resumed on September 18, 2023.
In its concluding remarks, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the NAB law had been used for political purposes and upheld the amendments, thereby reinstating the government’s previous actions concerning the law.
Follow us on our social media platforms here: Twitter WHATSAPP CHANNEL FACEBOOK PAGE
