ISLAMABAD, Dec 1 (APP): The Supreme Court on Thursday nominated Tariq Khosa, former secretary Anti Narcotics Force, to head a Commission over Memogate issue and submit report within three weeks after probing its authenticity. A nine-member special bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on constitutional petitions moved by Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) leaders Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif, Ishaq Dar, Khawaja Asif, Watan Party and others, in its order said that the Registrar office would seek consent of Tariq Khosa, former director general Federal Investigation Agency and inspector genera Balochistan.
The bench said in case he gave his consent, investigation of the issue should be handed over to him and all relevant provincial and federal authorities were directed to cooperate with him.
However, the bench noted that in case he expressed his inability, an appropriate order would be passed afterwards.
The former police officer was also given the freedom to associate any other relevant person for his assistance in probing the issue.
The Secretary Cabinet division was directed to facilitate the Commission while it would be entitled for all perks and privileges.
The Commission could also travel abroad for investigation purposes whereas the Pakistan commissions abroad were asked to share any information they had with them about the issue.
Elaborating the reason for appointing former police officer to head the Commission, the bench said that the step was taken to protect and secure evidences.
The bench also imposed restriction on Hussain Haqqani, former Pakistan ambassador to US, from travelling abroad by directing the secretaries of Interior and Foreign Affairs not to allow him without prior approval from the court.
The bench warned they would be held responsible if they failed to comply with Court’s order.
Hussain Haqqani was directed to fully cooperate with the Commission during investigation.
The bench said the respondents might also submit their replies within fifteen days to explain the situation.
It said that it was informed that the Prime Minister had already addressed the Special Committee on National Security through a letter and they welcome the investigation.
It said that they would appreciate if any incriminatory evidences received by the Committee could be shared with the Supreme Court, similarly, if they had any information they would reciprocate with the committee as their objective was the same not to compromise on the issue of national security, sovereignty and independence.
Giving justifications for its directive the bench observed in its order that the Memo issue, prima facie, had established two set of questions, initiation of civil liabilities/constitutional obligations under Article 6 of the Constitution and criminal proceedings.
Citing US Supreme Court verdict, the bench said that in Richard Nixon’s case, the former US president faced the US Senate committee and pre-trial evidences collected by the special prosecutor in Watergate case.
Finally the issue came to the US Supreme Court which ruled that collection of pre-trial evidences could be collected.
At the outset of proceedings, Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif, quaid of PML-N, appearing in person, said that Memogate issue posed serious threat to the national security.
Replying to questions of members of the bench over Court’s jurisdiction in such issues, he replied that opposition in the parliament was playing an active role and had presented different resolutions but no due attention was paid.
He complained that the Abbottabad incident was taken up in the Parliament after lapse of eight weeks.
Justice Mian Sqib Nisar pointed out that he had shown trust in the Court which had no omnipotent powers as it was regulated through laws.
He questioned how indulgence of the Court could be warranted through Article 184 (3) of the Constitution!
He told him that he had already admitted that the issue fell within domain of Parliament.
The Chief Justice told PML-N leader that the issue pertained to two types of aspects, civil in which the parliament could take care of and in criminal the Court could be indulged but it would require incriminatory evidences.
He said they could not blame anyone unless there was sufficient material before them.
Nawaz Sharif said that they wanted an independent body to probe the issue.
He alleged that Hussain Haqqani as ambassador of the country could not go for such thing without approval from the concerned authorities.
To bench’s question, he said that he had respect for the parliament but so far he was disappointed as nothing could happen over joint resolution on Abbottabad incident.
The PML-N leader said the Court could summon experts to conduct investigation to access the truth.
He said the people were looking towards superior judiciary as it had succeeded in recovery of embezzled public money.
Ishaq Dar, PML-N leader and member of Committee on National Security, appeared and said that he was very consistent in sovereignty of the parliament but they could not get to the bottom of truth in the said case despite introduction of Article 19A (Access to information) through 19the Amendment.
Justice Nisar questioned that his concern was that the parliament did not take up the issue, if it took up whether he would go there instead coming to the Supreme Court!
Ishaq Dar replied that he would come to Supreme Court due to certain apprehensions.
To bench’s query he said that the Committee on National Security had no constitutional mandate as it was only objective specific and was constituted after recommendations of the All Parties Conference.
The Chief Justice observed that the case required forensic examination as evident from the statement of federal interior minister who had admitted in one of his media talks that no letters were ever written, however, text massaging between the former ambassador and Ejaz Mansoor, US citizen of Pakistani origin, had taken place.
Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan observed that for access to information, the petitioners could approach the government.
Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan the PML leader that he had seen on TV channels contents of the text messages.
The Chief Justice said that they were not children sitting there, they were concerned over incidents of May 2, Memogate and Salala check posts! He said everyone should be honest to the nation as nothing could be condoned.
“No one should have fears. With grace of God, every institution should function but guilty be punished in accordance with law,” he added.
The CJ said whether they lived or not the country’s sovereignty must be protected at all costs.
Attorney General for Pakistan Molvi Anwarul Haq appeared and told the bench that the determination of forum for proceeding on the issue would be the question.
He said that he was not denying Court’s jurisdiction over issue of national importance.
He said the Committee on National Security would be holding its meeting tomorrow to discuss the issue and they could wait for the outcome.
Barrister Zafarullah of Watan Party, Tariq Asad Advocate, Salahuddin Mengal counsel for Abdul Qadir Baloch MNA, Sardar Yaqub Nasir MNA and Sanaullah Zahri Balochistan provincial minister, Saradar Asmatullah counsel for Sardar Muhammad Farooq, Ghaus Ali Shah, and other counsels for Hafiz ur Rehman etc also presented their contentions.
Further hearing was adjourned till date in office.
However, the bench noted that in case he expressed his inability, an appropriate order would be passed afterwards.
The former police officer was also given the freedom to associate any other relevant person for his assistance in probing the issue.
The Secretary Cabinet division was directed to facilitate the Commission while it would be entitled for all perks and privileges.
The Commission could also travel abroad for investigation purposes whereas the Pakistan commissions abroad were asked to share any information they had with them about the issue.
Elaborating the reason for appointing former police officer to head the Commission, the bench said that the step was taken to protect and secure evidences.
The bench also imposed restriction on Hussain Haqqani, former Pakistan ambassador to US, from travelling abroad by directing the secretaries of Interior and Foreign Affairs not to allow him without prior approval from the court.
The bench warned they would be held responsible if they failed to comply with Court’s order.
Hussain Haqqani was directed to fully cooperate with the Commission during investigation.
The bench said the respondents might also submit their replies within fifteen days to explain the situation.
It said that it was informed that the Prime Minister had already addressed the Special Committee on National Security through a letter and they welcome the investigation.
It said that they would appreciate if any incriminatory evidences received by the Committee could be shared with the Supreme Court, similarly, if they had any information they would reciprocate with the committee as their objective was the same not to compromise on the issue of national security, sovereignty and independence.
Giving justifications for its directive the bench observed in its order that the Memo issue, prima facie, had established two set of questions, initiation of civil liabilities/constitutional obligations under Article 6 of the Constitution and criminal proceedings.
Citing US Supreme Court verdict, the bench said that in Richard Nixon’s case, the former US president faced the US Senate committee and pre-trial evidences collected by the special prosecutor in Watergate case.
Finally the issue came to the US Supreme Court which ruled that collection of pre-trial evidences could be collected.
At the outset of proceedings, Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif, quaid of PML-N, appearing in person, said that Memogate issue posed serious threat to the national security.
Replying to questions of members of the bench over Court’s jurisdiction in such issues, he replied that opposition in the parliament was playing an active role and had presented different resolutions but no due attention was paid.
He complained that the Abbottabad incident was taken up in the Parliament after lapse of eight weeks.
Justice Mian Sqib Nisar pointed out that he had shown trust in the Court which had no omnipotent powers as it was regulated through laws.
He questioned how indulgence of the Court could be warranted through Article 184 (3) of the Constitution!
He told him that he had already admitted that the issue fell within domain of Parliament.
The Chief Justice told PML-N leader that the issue pertained to two types of aspects, civil in which the parliament could take care of and in criminal the Court could be indulged but it would require incriminatory evidences.
He said they could not blame anyone unless there was sufficient material before them.
Nawaz Sharif said that they wanted an independent body to probe the issue.
He alleged that Hussain Haqqani as ambassador of the country could not go for such thing without approval from the concerned authorities.
To bench’s question, he said that he had respect for the parliament but so far he was disappointed as nothing could happen over joint resolution on Abbottabad incident.
The PML-N leader said the Court could summon experts to conduct investigation to access the truth.
He said the people were looking towards superior judiciary as it had succeeded in recovery of embezzled public money.
Ishaq Dar, PML-N leader and member of Committee on National Security, appeared and said that he was very consistent in sovereignty of the parliament but they could not get to the bottom of truth in the said case despite introduction of Article 19A (Access to information) through 19the Amendment.
Justice Nisar questioned that his concern was that the parliament did not take up the issue, if it took up whether he would go there instead coming to the Supreme Court!
Ishaq Dar replied that he would come to Supreme Court due to certain apprehensions.
To bench’s query he said that the Committee on National Security had no constitutional mandate as it was only objective specific and was constituted after recommendations of the All Parties Conference.
The Chief Justice observed that the case required forensic examination as evident from the statement of federal interior minister who had admitted in one of his media talks that no letters were ever written, however, text massaging between the former ambassador and Ejaz Mansoor, US citizen of Pakistani origin, had taken place.
Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan observed that for access to information, the petitioners could approach the government.
Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan the PML leader that he had seen on TV channels contents of the text messages.
The Chief Justice said that they were not children sitting there, they were concerned over incidents of May 2, Memogate and Salala check posts! He said everyone should be honest to the nation as nothing could be condoned.
“No one should have fears. With grace of God, every institution should function but guilty be punished in accordance with law,” he added.
The CJ said whether they lived or not the country’s sovereignty must be protected at all costs.
Attorney General for Pakistan Molvi Anwarul Haq appeared and told the bench that the determination of forum for proceeding on the issue would be the question.
He said that he was not denying Court’s jurisdiction over issue of national importance.
He said the Committee on National Security would be holding its meeting tomorrow to discuss the issue and they could wait for the outcome.
Barrister Zafarullah of Watan Party, Tariq Asad Advocate, Salahuddin Mengal counsel for Abdul Qadir Baloch MNA, Sardar Yaqub Nasir MNA and Sanaullah Zahri Balochistan provincial minister, Saradar Asmatullah counsel for Sardar Muhammad Farooq, Ghaus Ali Shah, and other counsels for Hafiz ur Rehman etc also presented their contentions.
Further hearing was adjourned till date in office.
No comments:
Post a Comment