ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has asked that why it should take action to probe the audio leaks of former chief justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar when the concerned parties are not interested in it.

A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Athar Minallah conducted hearing of the petition moved by president of Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA) Salahuddin Ahmed Advocate and member of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) Syed Haider Imam Rizvi.

The bench also said that that a commission cannot be formed to probe the audio clip without proper grounds.  During the hearing, the IHC Chief Justice asked from Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed Khan that to whom the court should issue orders regarding an inquiry. Khan replied that the petition had been filed under Article 199-C of the Constitution — that relates to a high court’s jurisdiction in cases regarding the enforcement of fundamental rights.

He added that it seemed that they (petitioners) have filed a proxy petition and a perception should not be given that the petitioners are arguing someone else’s case. He added that sometimes people did not know when they were being used.

Says why it should move to probe ex-CJP audio leaks when concerned parties not interested

Referring to an affidavit by former Gilgit-Baltistan chief judge Rana Shamim in which he accused ex-CJP Saqib Nisar of colluding to deny bails to Nawaz and Maryam before general elections 2018, the AGP said this is the season of harassing and pressuring judges.

 He also said that sometimes an audio, sometimes some concocted affidavit is being released.

He mentioned that there was a prime minister (Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto) who was hanged on the court’s orders. He added that former prime minister Benazir Bhutto’s government was not restored but another one was restored and briefcases full [of cash] were also given in the past. The AGP further said that if the petitioners wanted to conduct inquiries into past events, they should amend their petition. He asked that why should we probe the matters of only 2017 and afterwards? Let’s go to [the tenure of] Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, he maintained.

He also asked that why people are choosing only one prime minister and coming to court as their proxy? He said that one chief minister called a judge and the [court’s] decision was declared void but action was not taken against anyone.

At this, the SHCBA president said that the AGP was trying to distract the court regarding the matter at hand. 

The attorney general contended that all matters of the past could be sent to the parliament.

Justice Athar observed that any audio or video could be constructed in today’s age of advanced technology. He added that anybody can make an audio and ask for investigation. He questioned that what effect would it have on ongoing appeals if we order an inquiry into this audiotape?

The attorney general contended without naming Maryam that all matters were related to one appeal. He said that he was willing to file an amended petition himself, seeking accountability of past incidents.

Referring to the case related to the ex-GB judge’s affidavit, the petitioner said that if the case could be taken up the court then the petition related to the audiotape could also be heard.

The IHC CJ noted that the matter of the affidavit was different because the person concerned — Rana Shamim — had himself approached the court. He also said that you are unsure yourself about the [authenticity of] the audiotape you are mentioning. A commission can be formed when there are grounds.

Later, the court deferred the hearing in this matter till December 24 for further proceedings.