ISLAMABAD              -             The Supreme Court of Pakistan Monday questioned that why the Armed Forces are not included in the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999. A three-member special bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah conducted hearing of the constitutional petition of PTI Chairman Imran Khan against the amendments in the NAO 1999. During the hearing, Justice Mansoor posed three questions to Imran Khan’s counsel. First, he said that why Armed Forces are excluded from the jurisdiction of the NAB law, and what are its reasons, while the judges fall under this law. What were constitutional and non-constitutional reasons that to keep armed forces out of the NAB jurisdiction. Khawaja Haris, counsel for Imran Khan, argued that the Supreme Court in order to fill the void asked the Parliament to legislate on army chief extension. He said that in Asfandyar Wali’s case the apex court had declared the amendments null and void. Justice Mansoor said that amendments in Asfandyar Wali’s case were declared null and void as those were contrary to fundamental rights. He said to the counsel that you are telling the court to include which are missing in the law. Justice Ijaz noted that after amending in many provisions the NAB law has become ineffective. He added that the petitioner is requesting the court to restore the law in its original form. Justice Mansoor said that the clauses which have been amended are not against the fundamental rights. Justice Mansoor said that the second question is that when the people have elected your client for five years then why they wanted that the decisions on national important issues are made on the roads, then would it be democracy? The judge said that if the members leave the Parliament and come on the roads, then how the democratic system would function. He further asked the counsel that his client should have raised objections on the amendments in the Parliament instead of approaching the court. The Chief Justice observed that there were many flaws in the NAO and a person on the basis of mere allegations could be arrested and kept in NAB custody for 90 days. The amendments in the NAB law are good, while before amendments it was much criticised. Kh Haris said that he is not in favour of arrest during the investigation in criminal cases, including NAO. He said that even if the best laws are not implemented then those lose its effectiveness and he does not want that whole law is struck down. Justice Mansoor questioned what the general public is saying about the amendments. He further asked should the apex court determine that people are affected by the amendments in the NAB law. The Chief Justice said that in Darshan Mashi case the public has approached the apex court, many articles were written on this case. He questioned whether the public has approached the Court in NAB amendments. Kh Haris said that an NGO has approached on behalf of Darshan Mashi and he has wish that an NGO raise the issue of corruption in the court. Justice Mansoor said that the petitions against the NAB amendments are also pending in the Islamabad High Court. He said that can we sent to the IHC and wait for its decision. Later, the bench deferred the hearing Tuesday (today) for further hearing.