ISLAMABAD - Pakistan People’s Party Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on Friday moved a review petition in the Supreme Court requesting for deletion of his name from the Joint Investigation Team damning report by reviewing the judgment on the fake bank accounts case.

The PPP Chairman contended that he was denied the right of audience before issuing the detailed order dated January 7 of 2019, wherein certain observations and directions were issued regarding him without mentioning the specific verbal and oral directions of expunging his name from Exit Control List (ECL) as well as JIT report.

Bilawal also opposed the constitution of implementation bench in the case arguing the setting up of implementation bench in the context of criminal proceedings would inevitably prejudice the probe.

He also requested for institution of larger bench to determine the jurisdiction of Article 184(3) of the Constitution.

The review petition recalled that former Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar in one of the proceedings also expressed serious displeasure against the JIT and the federal government over placing the name of Bilawal on ECL and in report.

He contends that while expressing displeasure the former Chief Justice Nisar verbally yet categorically directed and ordered the government to remove his name from the JIT report and ECL.

“That eventually when the Order was subsequently issued, the direction for expunging the name of the Applicant (Bilawal) from the JIT report was also not part of the Order,” the review petition stated.

“Instead paragraphs 35 and 37 of the Order contained observations and directions, not in consonance with but rather contradictory to the verbal directions given in open court and the commitment made on behalf of the JIT in the Court, for expunging the name of the Applicant (Bilawal) from JIT report,” it further added.

Instead, the petition further stated, the applicant has been subjected to adverse consequences including further unwarranted probe and investigation by National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and JIT.

The observations regarding Bilawal in the detailed order has authorised NAB to probe him further in respect of a matter entirely based on an admittedly flawed and misconstrued JIT Report, Bilawal stated.

The observations in the January 7 order were, “However, it is clarified that this would not prevent the NAB to probe their cases further and in case sufficient material is found connecting the said persons with cognizable offences, it shall not be precluded from making an appropriate request to the Federal Government to place their names on the ECL or take any appropriate action provided by law.”

“Needless to add that authorization accorded by this Hon’ble Court to NAB for probe, enquiry and investigation would not take much and long to be construed as direction to prosecute the Applicant irrespective of the merits and non culpability of the Applicant.”

Bilawal, the Member of National Assembly, feared that he shall henceforth necessarily be dragged into probe by NAB till the time that all possibilities of his ‘not being connected with a cognizable offence’ are exhaustively explored to the satisfaction of NAB team being specially constituted for and working in this individual case at Islamabad.

He stated that he shall be subjected to this degrading treatment in spite of the fact that he never held any public office during the material period and despite there being nothing incriminating found against him.

“It is submitted that this reversal of the presumption of innocence against the Applicant in violation of Article 13 of the Constitution of Pakistan, is based on nothing but the Applicant’s relationship with the primary subject of this exercise.”

Moreover, he stated that the suo motu powers are to be exercised most sparingly and in a manner that the Fundamental Rights of individuals including those guaranteed under Article 10A and 25 of the Constitution are fully given effect to and not diluted or even nullified.

He further argued that the invoking suo motu jurisdiction in respect of any pending probe by any authority is not warranted as any order or observations made by the top court would necessarily prejudice the case.

It is further submitted that the verbal orders regarding removal of Bilawal’s name from JIT Report and ECL were completely ignored by the federal government, NAB and JIT.

“In any civilised society aspiring to be governed by rule of law, it would be completely inconceivable and indeed most destructive and subversive of all norms of civility and concept of justice that the directions given by the Chief Justice of the country and meant to be enforced and given effect by the authorities, in most solemn judicial proceedings, conducted in public glare, by the highest Court of the country are completely ignored and not given effect to by any authority, body or Government.”

It is submitted that while it was one thing that the Government, JIT, NAB did not give effect to the direction given by the former chief justice and for which they could be penalized by top court subsequently.

The January 7 detailed order contains no reference of such defiance by government and JIT of an earlier order regarding expunging name of Bilawal from JIT Report and ECL, the review petition stated.

It is contended that repeated formation of JITs to probe individuals not only shows lack of confidence in the appropriate authorities but also weaken such bodies which would become completely dependent upon extra legal parallel bodies.

If the statutory bodies or authorities are found deficient, the solution is to improve and strengthen their structure, capacity, neutrality, professional competence and training and not by way of creation of ad hoc parallel bodies like JITs which suddenly spring out for particular individuals, it added.

Interestingly, the Sindh government also filed a separate review petition in the same case requesting the top court to modify its January 7 detailed order to include that Bilawal and Chief Minister Sindh Murad Ali Shah be removed from the JIT report as was orally directed during the course of hearing.

The separate review petition filed by Advocate General Sindh Salman Talibuddin further requested the top court to revise its earlier order and direct that the probe be conducted by NAB at Karachi instead of Islamabad.