ISLAMABAD: The main lawyer who pleaded with the request of Judge Qazi Faez Isa before a court of the Supreme Court said on Tuesday that confidential information related to the property had been delivered to the plaintiff without the approval of the legal authority.
Attorney Muneer A. Malik said the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and the Federal Revenue Board (FBR) shared confidential UK property information with Abdul Waheed Dogar on whose complaint the investigation against Judge SC began.
"Information on three properties in the United Kingdom was acquired through surveillance during the interregional period between the announcement of the Tehreek-i-Labaik Pakistan-Dharna verdict of February 6 and the filing of the complaint," said the lawyer.
"It means that something was being cooked," said Judge Maqbool Baqar, a 10-member court member who had taken a series of petitions that challenged the presentation of the presidential reference against Judge Isa on the non-declaration of foreigners. properties in the declaration of wealth.
It says material collected through espionage, espionage, complete surveillance of family members.
One of the highlights of the otherwise calm and quiet proceedings was the sudden appearance of the plaintiff, Mr. Dogar, in the courtroom on Tuesday. The bank asked him to take a seat instead of standing near the stand in the midst of his attempts to be noticed.
Attorney Malik reminded the court that Mr. Dogar had filed a complaint with the Asset Recovery Unit (ARU), noting that, being a law-abiding citizen and investigative journalist, he believed in everyone's responsibility, including judges , and that he had been able to acquire information on the properties of three judges of the superior court, namely Judge Isa, Judge KK of the Superior Court of Sindh Agha and former judge of the Superior Court of Lahore, Furrukh Irfan.
The lawyer said that in the case against former justice president Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, the then president had authorized the submission of the reference, but Dogar was not even a public official to share confidential information.
He said that the ARU in the Secretariat of the Prime Minister received the complaint on April 10 and that the president of the ARU, Mirza Shahzad Akbar, acted immediately under the direction of the minister of law to interview Mr. Dogar within four days. However, the plaintiff only shared the results of the "online search" that he said he had acquired through the London land registry office on a property in the name of Judge Isa's wife. But he did not provide further evidence regarding other properties, the lawyer said, wondering how Mr. Dogar could have collected that information without even knowing the name of Judge Isa's wife. He stressed that properties under the laws of the United Kingdom could not be searched online due to data privacy laws unless the person in whose title the property was registered filed an application or someone duly authorized by a court of law.
Perhaps the version, as the lawyer advanced, was that the plaintiff had received the information since he was an "attorney", observed Judge Umar Ata Bandial, who presided over the full court. He said the lawyer's argument was that Mr. Dogar was fed the information by the FIA and the FBR and also without proper authorization.
Attorney Malik wondered if the judge of the superior court could be investigated in such a way that he could be prosecuted under Article 209 of the Constitution by the Supreme Judicial Council. This was done through espionage, snooping and full surveillance of family members, the lawyer feared.
After the collection of the material, the complaint was initiated for the presentation of the reference against Judge Isa for misconduct, said the lawyer.
If such a way of collecting material and evidence against the judge was approved, then a trend would be established that any SHO could initiate investigations against judges in the future, the main court was reminded. Such a trend would eliminate the concept of separation of the executive from the judiciary, the lawyer argued. There were certain guarantees before proceeding against a judge under article 209, the lawyer explained.
Judge Faisal Arab said that only the president and the SJC were the creators of opinion to proceed against a judge. Others, including SHOs, did not issue opinions against the judges, he said.
Posted on Dawn, October 16, 2019
Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1511072/secret-data-fed-to-complainant-in-faez-isa-case-counsel