ISLAMABAD - The counsel of Pakistan Tehrike-Insaf (PTI) Monday continued his arguments on the petition of the PTI Chairman Imran Khan against the NAB amendments. A three-member 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 Ijaz said that if public money is misappropriated, it will affect the FR of the citizens and Supreme Court can look into it because interest of the public at large needs to be secured. Justice Mansoor said that once again court was entering into the policy matter. Justice Mansoor questioned that how someone on assumption could claim his right that if there was no corruption then the money would have come to the national exchequer and that money would have been spent on the development on his area. He said that if government in the budget allocates money on the general development of the society. However, any citizen says that money should have been spent on the development on his area. He said would then the budget, which is the policy, will be challenged in the courts. Justice Bandial asked Kh Haris, “You are saying that in the UN and international conventions benchmark have been set to tackle corruption and the law is below that benchmark then it would become ineffective. The standard to fight corruption in the UN conventions should mirror in that NAB Ordinance, adding whether we have transferred that benchmark in our laws.” The court questioned that how the high international standard be met, adding the legislature that makes the laws if does not go with the standard then can the apex court direct the Parliament to transfer the standard into the legislation in terms of Article 24 of the Constitution. Justice Mansoor remarked that there are international conventions on providing numerous facilities to the disable persons. “However, our law is restricted only to the allocation of 2 per cent quota in the jobs, and this way the UN convention does not reflect in the Pakistani laws. He questioned could the Parliament be directed the make law as per the UN conventions. If the UN had made good laws then should those be our laws Are we bound to translate the international conventions in our laws? Justice Ijaz inquired that is there any country in the world that would legitimize corruption. Once the law was made to tackle the corruption but that had been whittled down. What are the compelling reasons? The offences have been taken out of the NAB law, adding what are the deterrents now to stop corruption. He said in his view the amendments were made to legitimize corruption. Justice Ijaz said that the standard the court has to determine for accountability process is of Hazrat Umar. He said instead of taking stringent measures to tackle corruption, the steps were taken to legitimize it. The Chief Justice adjourning the case until Tuesday (today) asked Khawaja Asif to conclude his arguments by Thursday