Saqib Nisar audio case : Commission is formed when there is ground for it: IHC


Islamabad High Court (IHC) has remarked the commission is formed when there is a ground for it.

Petition seeking constitution of inquiry commission to probe into alleged video of former Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Saqib Nisar came up for hearing before a single bench of Islamabad High Court IHC) led by Chief Justice (CJ) Athar Minallah here Wednesday.

Attorney General (AG) appeared to assist the court on the maintainability of the petition.

The court inquired tell us court should direct whom for investigation.

AG told the court the petition has been filed under article 199 of the constitution. It seems as if it a proxy petition which has been filed by them. Such impression should not be created that the petitioner is contesting a proxy case.

AG told the court there was one other Prime Minister (PM) who was executed on vague court’s order. Benazir government is not restored while Nawaz Sharif government is restored. Packed brief cases were given in the past. If the petitioner has to go to the past then he should make amendment in the petition. Because if we go to 2017 then we go till Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. If a facility of exiling is given to one PM then why it is not given to Bhutto. Some time we don’t know that some one is using us. This is season of harassing and pressurizing the judiciary. Different videos are made in different times. Some time document is released.

He said the petitioner has made mention of 2017 incidents. This should also be ascertained as to why Justice Sajjad Ali Shah was removed. How the suit cases packed with money were routed. We hold those people accountable who are alive. Why the people are coming to the court as proxy for one PM. Thousands of people were sacked. No video in respect of them came. It is a proxy war. Today every one is saying he has two videos and he has four videos. The land of hundreds of people is occupied illegally. But no video of them came.

The court remarked “ Bars have waged great struggle for the independence of judiciary. Today we hear Salah ud Din.

The AG told the court today is dooms day. The lawyers tear the clothes of the judges. Then a condemnation statement is issued. It was bar which chanted slogans against the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) while standing in Supreme Court (SC).

Salah ud Din said AG is holding bar association responsible for every case. See the statements given by PM Imran Khan against the judiciary and judges. This is said to divert the attention that accountability should be held in respect of the period of 70 years or otherwise.

The court remarked if we declare the petition seeking investigation into audio maintainable then what will happen.

AG told the court all the matters of past be sent to the parliament for debate. One appeal against the conviction is running in this court.

The petitioner Salah Ud Din said those to whom cases pertain have not come in the court. It is my stance that the courts are being made controversial. The court can stop this matter by ordering investigation.

The court observed today the technology is advance. Any audio or video can be formed. If some one makes audio and asks for holding investigation, If we start investigation then it will leave what impact on the pending appeals.

AG said I am saying this too that proxy war is being fought. All the things lead to one appeal. The accountability should be started from the past.

Salah ud Din advocate said the affidavit case is pending hearing in this court.

The court remarked affidavit matter is separate matter. Those who have given affidavit have come in the court in person. Commission can be constituted on the matter if there is some ground. If those whose cases are there don’t bring any audio in the court then why should we do. Is there any one to claim the ownership of audio. Tell us what ground you have for this.

AG told the court they should bring amended petition I will take all the matter to parliament. Request for probing into the past incidents should also be made part of the petition.

The court while addressing the petitioner remarked “ AG has extended a big offer to you.

AG said this is my basic objection that it is a proxy petition.

The court adjourned the hearing of the case till December 24.