SC reserves verdict in NAB Amendment case

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has reserved a verdict in NAB Amendment case after the hearing on the government’s appeals against the nullification of the NAB amendments has been completed, here on Thursday.

The Supreme Court has reserved its decision on the government’s appeals against the NAB amendments, providing a week’s time for those involved to submit further written arguments.

During the hearing, PTI founder Khan appeared before the five-member bench via video link and after the break in the hearing, Founder PTI started his arguments when Khawaja Haris accomplished the arguments.

During the hearing, Justice Athar Minallah observed that NAB has violated all fundamental rights till date, adding that before NAB, there was Accountability Act that was the same law.

Justice Minallah noted that the Accountability Act was also used against political opponents.

“Can parliament repeal drug laws?” Chief Justice asked Khawaja Haris.

“Parliament cannot make some laws or abolish some,” Haris replied.

Parliament is supreme, it can make laws and abolish them, Justice Athar Minullah maintained.

In my view, the supreme constitution is to which everyone is subject, Justice Jamal Mandokhel

The word Supreme is used in the Constitution only for the Supreme Court, Justice Jamal Mandokhel.

Talking to the PTI founder, the CJP asked him, “Can you hear us, Do you want to say something related to the case.”

“I can hear you,” the founder PTI replied.

He said, “I did not understand one thing, you wrote that I scored political points at the last hearing. I don’t understand what political point scoring I made?”

“It would be great if you speak in Urdu,” CJP Isa said to the PTI founder.

“I was hurt to come to know that I am an irresponsible character due to which it will not be broadcast live,” the PTI founder complained.

“It would be great if you speak in Urdu,” CJP Isa said to the PTI founder.

“I was hurt to come to know that I am an irresponsible character due to which it will not be broadcast live,” the PTI founder complained.

Judges do not explain their decision, you can file Nazir Second, Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa

“I oppose the government’s appeal in the NAB amendment case,” he said, adding, “My watch worth was two and a half crore rupees but shown for three billion rupees.”

“Stay on your case,” Chief Justice Isa directed to the founder PTI

“I say NAB chairman should be appointed by the Supreme Court. If the government and the opposition do not agree on the chairman NAB, then the third umpire appoint the chairman,” the founder PTI said, adding “NAB remains under the third umpire.”

“You are again heading towards the subjudice cases,” Justice Jamal Mandokhel reminded Imran Khan.

Earlier, the SC rejected the plea seeking a live broadcast of the case.

In a detailed order on the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) government’s plea, the SC maintained “In live-streaming cases, there is always a possibility that the facility may be misused or exploited for ulterior or personal purposes. There is also the possibility of grandstanding while the nation watches. This court must be vigilant against such misuse and/or exploitation.”

It further stated that when the head of a political party wants to be heard, there is a real probability that these hearings may be used for “political purposes and point scoring” and in respect of matters which do not concern these appeals.

“This was a paramount consideration when we had dismissed the application. And, our apprehension proved correct later in the day”, it added.

Earlier in the day, the federal government has released photographs of the cell where Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan is being held.

The image, along with other documents, was submitted to the Supreme Court to counter claims that Imran Khan was being denied access to his legal counsel in the NAB amendments case.

The government also denied allegations of mistreatment and solitary confinement, asserting that the PTI leader is receiving all necessary amenities, including books, an air conditioner, a TV, and meetings with his lawyers.

Furthermore, they suggested that the Supreme Court could form a commission to investigate these claims if deemed necessary.

Additionally, the government provided a list of individuals who have met with the PTI founder in jail, refuting the claims that he was denied access to legal counsel.

During the last hearing of the National Accountability (NAB) Ordinance 1999 amendment case, the Supreme Court permitted Khawaja Haris to meet Imran Khan at any time. The SC also ordered that all records related to the NAB amendments case be made available to the plaintiff, Imran Khan.

A five-member Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa and including Justices Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Athar Minallah, and Hasan Azhar Rizvi heard the case.

In its review petition under the SC Practice and Procedure Law, the federal government argued that the NAB amendments do not violate basic rights and requested the Supreme Court to nullify its previous decision in the case. They emphasized that legislation is a right of the Parliament.

In a 2-1 majority verdict, the Supreme Court approved Imran Khan’s petition challenging the amendments made to the country’s accountability laws during the previous Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM)-led government.

The court also reinstated graft cases against public office holders that had been closed following the amendments to the National Accountability Bureau laws.