[ad_1]
The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday gave its verdict in the May 29 and June 25 audio leak case of the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
Specifically, a two-judge bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan heard the case, with Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan also participating.
The apex court stayed the May 29 and June 25 orders of the Islamabad High Court and issued notices to Bushra Bibi, wife of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, and Najam ul Haq, son of former Chief Attorney General Saqib Nisar.
The apex court also allowed the federal government’s challenge to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) verdict.
During the hearing, Justice Aminuddin Khan asked the Islamabad High Court whether it had ascertained whether the recordings were genuine and who was recording the calls. The Solicitor General replied that the investigation was still ongoing.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan said no one in the country was willing to reveal the truth, adding that the Supreme Court had suspended the proceedings of the inquiry committee.
The apex court said the authenticity of the recording needed to be verified. The court also asked the Islamabad High Court whether it had considered this aspect of the case.
The Solicitor General informed the court that the proceedings in the Islamabad High Court had not been finalised and the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction under Article 199.
The apex court has been informed that the Islamabad High Court cannot conduct an inquiry and the matter will be heard again on a date to be announced later.
Earlier, the federal government challenged the Islamabad High Court (IHC) verdict in the Supreme Court in the case of Bushra Bibi and former Chief Justice Saqib Nisar’s son in connection with the alleged audio leak.
The appeal names the former chief justice’s son, the Parent-Teacher Association, the Department of Defense and others as parties.
The government argued that the IHC ruling was contrary to facts and the high court had granted the relief without even raising a request.
The plea also stated that the IHC had no power to take notice action on its own initiative under Section 199 and therefore the High Court’s judgment should be declared invalid.
The federal government said when the alleged audio leak of the ticket distribution came to light, the Speaker of the National Assembly took notice of it and formed a committee.
The former chief justice’s son had also challenged the independent high court’s committee summons.
The government argued that the independent high court exceeded its mandate by asking the agency to submit a report and that the high court could not conduct fact-finding.
It is noteworthy that the IHC declared “any form of surveillance” of citizens illegal and unconstitutional and asked Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to explain who is “responsible for large-scale surveillance”.
Indian High Court Justice Babar Sattar issued a written order on Bushra Bibi and Najamus Saqib’s defence against the audio leak.
In a written order, Justice Sattar said the federal government was responsible for surveillance of 4 million citizens and that Prime Minister Shehbaz and cabinet members were “collectively and individually” responsible for large-scale surveillance.
The independent high committee also asked the prime minister to submit a report on the legal framework of the surveillance system within six weeks. The report must also clarify whether the surveillance is carried out in accordance with the law and the constitution.
It also instructs the prime minister to explain who is responsible for installing surveillance systems and mass surveillance and “who is responsible for systems that affect the privacy of citizens”.
Meanwhile, the IHC also issued a contempt notice to the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) chairman and its members, asking them to submit a reply within six weeks. “The court is of the view that the PTA has clearly misunderstood the monitoring system in the report,” it added.
[ad_2]
Source link
