Amendments made in NAB laws are good too, Chief Justice of Pakistan

ISLAMABAD, August 05 (Online): Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) has remarked NAB amendments and amendments made in NAB laws are good too.
He further remarked “elections too are a form of accountability. The voters hold their representatives accountable in election. Is the case of accumulation of assets beyond known source of income must for accountability? People were arrested for one or two plots in small housing societies. Earlier every case went to anti terrorism court. The Supreme Court (SC) lessened the burden of anti terrorism court by giving the decision.

A 3-member bench of SC presided over by CJP took up the case for hearing.

Khawaja Haris counsel for Imran Khan argued during the hearing of the case more amendments have been made in NAB laws a day before. NAB is important respondent of whom. It should be represented too. Draft of new amendments has been filed in the court. We will challenge the new amendments when they become law. The basis of the case will remain the same. I will open my arguments. The present amendments are violation of constitutional mandate. The court can nullify constitutional amendments if they are in clash with the basic structure. Accountability is must for good governance. There can be no concept of good governance without accountability. The pending cases became ineffective due to NAB amendments.

He argued the court decision is there. Parliament was asked to enact law. SC has declared good governance as basic right. Court has directed to parliament in many cases to enact law. If murder offence is eliminated then it will be deemed to be violation of basic rights. The court has declared corruption as cancer of the society in Asfand Yar case. The cases of misuse of powers and assets case have been abolished due to NAB law amendments. Good governance and accountability too are basic rights of the people. All the cases will stand dismissed from the court after the amendments.

First question of accumulation of assets beyond known sources of income was asked from Hadrat Umar. After amendment no case regarding accumulation of assets beyond known sources of income can be made till the corruption is proved. The concept of basic structure is there. If you want you can withdraw the past judicial decision. The elected representatives tender resignation under political strategy and decisions.

NAB counsel took the plea he will follow the arguments of Attorney General (AG) in this case.

Makhdoom Ali Khan appeared in the court on behalf of federal government. He took the plea new amendments have not become part of law so far. I can not give any view unless the new amendments are made law. If court orders then he will file his reply.

Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan raised the question is accountability part of parliamentary democracy. Counsel is of the view the powers of accountability have been reduced due to NAB amendments. The amendments which have been made from 2022 have been implemented from 1985. If they are implemented from past then the sentences will be abolished and the penalties will be returned. This way the amount of plea bargain will have to be returned. Can parliament legislate to afford benefit to its specific persons? If there is matter of basic rights involved in this case then we will hear it. Otherwise it does not come in the jurisdiction of court. If corruption has been committed on public money then it comes under the violation of basic rights.

Justice Mansoor Ali shah remarked amendments will have to be made in the petition to challenge new amendments. Independent judiciary is included in basic structure of the constitution. We will have to see what power of judiciary has been abolished due to NAB amendments. The case here relates to amendments in law. Counsel is saying to bring amendments to some level.

If government dissolves NAB tomorrow then will the parties concerned come here for the formation of NAB? Can court issue directives to parliament. Arrest cannot be made on decision making after NAB law amendments. If you think NAB laws are incorrect then why you don’t put bill in the parliament. The structure of law should come under discussion in assembly rather than the court. Does he seek permission from his voters when representative of a constituency resigns?

The court while seeking reply from NAB on NAB amendments adjourned the hearing of the case till August 19.