Islamabad
\nIn a 2-1 verdict, the Supreme Court (SC) on Friday ordered to restore the corruption cases against public office holders that were withdrawn after amendments were made to the country\u2019s accountability laws.
\nThe reserved verdict was announced by a three-member bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah on PTI Chairman Imran Khan\u2019s 2022 petition challenging amendments made to the accountability laws.
\nCJP Bandial and Justice Ahsan declared Imran\u2019s plea to be maintainable while Justice Shah disagreed with the majority verdict, according to which not just the corruption cases but also the inquiries and investigations were directed to be restored.
\nThe court also declared some amendments to the accountability laws to be contrary to the Constitution and struck them down.
\nThese included one that limited the National Accountability Bureau\u2019s (NAB) jurisdiction to cases involving over Rs500 million and one that allowed the accused to claim the amount of plea bargain deposited after being acquitted.
\nThe court directed that the cases that were withdrawn after NAB\u2019s jurisdiction was limited to investigating cases below Rs500m be fixed for hearing in accountability courts.
\nThe court also declared null and void the verdicts issued by the accountability courts in light of the amendments made to the laws.
\nIn a written order issued in the evening, a copy of which is available with Dawn.com, the court said: \u201cAll inquiries, investigations, and references which have been disposed of on the basis of the struck down sections are restored to their positions prior to the enactment of the 2022 Amendments and shall be deemed to be pending before the relevant fora.\u201d
\nIt also directed the NAB and accountability courts to proceed with the restored proceedings in accordance with the law.
\n\u201cThe NAB and\/or all other fora shall forthwith return the record of all such matters to the relevant fora and in any event not later than seven days from today which shall be proceeded with in accordance with law from the same stage these were at when the same were disposed of\/closed\/returned,\u201d the order added.
\nMeanwhile, in his dissenting note, Justice Shah said the primary question raised in the case was not about the \u201calleged lopsided amendments introduced in the NAB law by the Parliament but about the paramountcy of the Parliament\u201d.
\nHe said the question was about the constitutional importance of parliamentary democracy and separation of powers between the three state organs, as well as the limits of the jurisdiction of the court, comprising unelected judges, \u201csecond judging the purpose and policy of an enactment passed by the Parliament, without any clear violation beyond reasonable doubt, of any of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution or of any other constitutional provision\u201d.
\nThe judge said the majority verdict had \u201cfallen short\u201d in recognising the constitutional command that the state would exercise its power and authority through the chosen representatives of the people and in recognising the principle of trichotomy of powers, which Justice Shah was the \u201cfoundation of parliamentary democracy\u201d.
\n\u201cWithout setting out a clear and objective test for determining how the claimed right to have accountability of the parliamentarians is an integral part of any of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution, the majority judgment through a long winding conjectural path of far-fetched \u2018in turn\u2019 effects has tried hard to \u2018ultimately\u2019 reach an apprehended violation of the fundamental rights,\u201d the dissenting note reads.
\nIt concluded that the majority judgement had thus \u201cfallen short to appreciate that what Parliament has done, Parliament can undo; the legislative power of the Parliament is never exhausted. If the Parliament can enact the NAB law, it can also repeal the entire law or amend the same.\u201d
\nIn June 2022, the PTI chief had moved the apex court against amendments made to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) ordinance under the National Accountability (Second Amendment) Act 2022.
\nThe amendments made several changes to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999, including reducing the term of the NAB chairman and prosecutor general to three years, limiting NAB\u2019s jurisdiction to cases involving over Rs500 million, and transferring all pending inquiries, investigations, and trials to the relevant authorities.
\nIn his petition, the PTI chief had claimed that the amendments to the NAB law had been made to benefit influential accused persons and legitimise corruption.
\nIn recent hearings, Justice Shah had repeatedly urged for a full court to hear the case, citing the frozen Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) law.
\nHowever, CJP Bandial had opposed it, noting that his retirement was near and the matter had already been pending before the court for a considerable time \u2014 since at least July 19, 2022.
\nThe SC had reserved its verdict in the case on September 5, after 53 hearings, with the members of the three-judge bench debating the power of parliament to enact legislation with retrospective effect. Making a reference to the judgement, the bench had said something \u201cshort and sweet\u201d would be released soon.
\nSpeaking to the media outside the SC after the verdict was announced, PTI lawyer Shoaib Shaheen said that the first order of business of the previous Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) government was to introduce amendments to the NAB laws.
\nHe said that the amendments had been declared to be a violation of Articles 9 (security of person), 14 (inviolability of dignity of man, etc) and 89 (power of president to promulgate ordinances) of the Constitution.
\nHe further said that cases that were below Rs500m had been restored after today\u2019s verdict. He further said that the previous government had introduced several changes in order to benefit itself.
\n\u201cThe amendments were prepared by the Sharif family\u2019s personal lawyers,\u201d he alleged. At the same time, Shaheen said that the NAB was still being used to target Imran.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Islamabad In a 2-1 verdict, the Supreme Court (SC) on Friday ordered to restore the corruption cases against public office holders that were withdrawn after amendments were made to the country\u2019s accountability laws. The reserved verdict was announced by a three-member bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":326693,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[292],"class_list":{"0":"post-356137","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-top-news","8":"tag-supreme-court"},"yoast_head":"\n