ISLAMABAD: Farogh Naseem, who resigned a day earlier from his post as minister for law and justice to represent the government in the Supreme Court in the presidential reference against Justice Qazi Faez Isa, on Tuesday faced objection by the defense for his decision which he said he took on the “request of the Prime Minister Imran Khan”.
The objection comes a day after Justice Isa had urged the Supreme Court to not allow Naseem’s representation, saying his conduct comes within the definition of “tout”.
A ten-member full court bench, presided over by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, resumed hearing in the case, in which the former law minister appeared as the counsel for the government.
During the hearing, Justice Isa’s counsel, Munir A. Malik, argued that Naseem will have to present a certificate from the Attorney General of Pakistan Khalid Jawed Khan in order to be deemed appropriate for the representation.
“[I] respect Farogh Naseem, but [I] do object to his representation of the federal government,” said Malik.
In his arguments, Naseem said that he will also represent Special Assistant to PM on Accountability Shahzad Akbar.
“I was made a party to the case in a personal capacity, Irfan Qadir will represent me,” he said.
Malik said that according to the rules, the federal government is not allowed to hire a private counsel.
However, Justice Atta Bandial said that the defense counsel should not raise an objection and let the case proceed further. “The summer vacations are around the corner and we want the case to proceed,” he remarked.
BACKGROUND:
The federal government in May last year filed separate references with the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) against two Supreme Court judges, Justice Isa and Justice Karim Khan Agha, accusing the two judges of concealing their assets and recommend action against them under Article 209 of the Constitution.
According to Article 209, if the SJC finds the judge to be “incapable of performing the duties of his office or has been guilty of misconduct”, the president may remove the said judge from office.
Subsequently in August, Justice Isa approached the apex court and requested it to form a full-court bench comprising all eligible judges to hear his petition against the reference while accusing then chief justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa of “showing personal bias against him”.
He had argued that a judicial precedent for constituting a bench comprising the full court is already available in former chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry vs the president of Pakistan through secretary and others.
Later in September, he moved another petition making a similar request. The judge was of the view that matters narrated in accompanying civil miscellaneous application dated August 26 – “which may for the sake of brevity be read as a part hereof” – demonstrates the necessity for hearing by such a full-court bench.
“The petition also raises a number of important constitutional questions, including that of the independence of the judiciary, the formation of an independent opinion by the president, obtaining federal cabinet’s approval and other vital issues of surveillance, and the manner and method of collecting evidence against a judge of the Supreme Court and his family,” he had said.
from Pakistan Today https://ift.tt/2XMRYhW
Posts
0 Comments