Evidence against agencies not to be examined: SC
Friday, 19 Feb, 2010
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan said on Friday it will not examine evidence against intelligence agencies in the missing persons’ case.
A written order released to the media states that evidence and allegations of involvement of intelligence agencies in abducting people will be examined by an ‘appropriate forum at the relevant time.’
The written orders were released a week after the last hearing in the case, which was conducted by Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Sair Ali and Justice Tariq Pervez.
The four-page order noted that police officials have expressed their inability to make further probes in certain cases regarding the missing persons’ due to alleged involvement of various intelligence agencies.
Over a thousand people have been missing for the last four years amid allegations of intelligence agencies kidnapping them as part of in relation to the war against terror. The Supreme Court took notice of the complaints and started a probe in 2006.
After assurance of progress from Attorney General Anwar Mansur Sohail, the apex court will now take up the case again next week. —
However, while the ‘honourable’ judges in the Supreme Court are reluctant to investigate the despicable role of the ISI and other spy agencies in the case of missing persons in Pakistan, they seem to be extra pro-active and in an undue haste in not letting go a single chance to defame the democratic government. The traditional judiciary-military alliance against democracy seems to be at work yet again in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan?
CJ takes NAB to task over graft cases
By Nasir Iqbal
Saturday, 20 Feb, 2010
ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry upbraided the National Accountability Bureau on Friday for sitting on the court order of reopening corruption cases closed under the National Reconciliation Ordinance, including those against President Asif Ali Zardari pending in Swiss courts.
The chief justice made the remarks while hearing bail pleas of Syed Rahat Mehmood, Mohammad Akhtar and Mohammad Farooq Ansari, allegedly involved in a fraud case relating to the Bankers City Housing Society.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by the chief justice and comprising Justice Chaudhry Ijaz Ahmad and Justice Ghulam Rabbani warned NAB chairman Nawid Ahsan that coercive measures would be taken against him, including attachment of his salary, and NAB representatives would be stopped from appearing before the court if compliance of the Dec 16 verdict about NAB’s prosecutor general Dr Danishwar and additional prosecutor general Abdul Baseer Qureshi was not implemented by March 2 — the next date of hearing.
The court observed that after the NRO judgment the appearance of representatives/prosecutors on behalf of NAB in different cases had become irregular, except in a few cases where one of the prosecutors was appearing regularly.
The court summoned the NAB chairman after briefly adjourning the proceedings and asked him about his failure to implement the Dec 16, 2009, judgment of the 17-judge bench against the NRO.
In its verdict, the Supreme Court had expressed displeasure over the conduct and lack of proper and honest assistance provided to it by the NAB chairman, its prosecutor general and additional prosecutor general and suggested to the government to replace them with persons possessing high degree of competence and impeccable integrity.
On Friday, the court asked the NAB chairman why had the PG and APG not been removed so far.
The NAB chairman said he was seeking guidance from the law ministry on how to comply with the judgment. He also said that his post was protected by the Constitution and he could not be removed unless a reference was sent to the Supreme Judicial Council.
The bench said it wanted the NAB chairman to take action against the PG and APG because they were working under him. “We also know about the status of your post and we are looking into that as well,” the chief justice observed. He said: “Don’t think for a second that the court could not ensure implementation of its orders.”