ISLAMABAD: Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah of the Supreme Court observed on Monday that the process to seek the property of Judge Qazi Faez Isa, who faces a presidential reference, was apparently taking place without proper authorization from the competent authority.
The observation came from a full court of 10 judges during the hearing of a set of petitions that challenged the submission of the reference against Judge Isa.
Judge Sajjad Ali Shah noted that the presidential reference does not suggest anything about the dependence of Judge Isa's wife and children, while Judge Mansoor Shah questioned whether the Federal Revenue Board (FBR) had investigated this aspect. It's a mystery how the plaintiff discovered the exact addresses of the London properties, Judge Shah observed.
Judge Umar Ata Bandial, at the top of the bench, noted that the SC wanted to know how and why the higher judiciary, as the lawyer claimed, was being tried, and added that he had urged that the court should function to comply with their duties. of postponing cases for minor causes, which only brings shame.
The entire court hears the petitions regarding the presidential reference
Lead attorney Muneer A. Malik, alleging Judge Isa's case, recalled that the FBR had sent a notice to Judge Isa's wife in 2015 about not filing tax returns, but not Judge Isa himself. He stressed that the reference against the judge does not claim that the three properties mentioned are his property, either directly or benami.
In fact, the reference indicates otherwise, the lawyer argued, adding that the reference had not leveled the accusation of dishonesty or corruption against the judge.
Judge Muneeb Akhtar asked the lawyer to ask if Judge Isa or his family had traveled to the United Kingdom during the period between the Dharna judgment of February 6 and the presentation of the reference.
"I will have to ask my client," the lawyer replied as he reminded the bank that Justice Isa's son lives in the United Kingdom. He stressed that he had tried to find the legal support behind the creation of the Asset Recovery Unit (ARU) under the presidency of Mirza Shahzad Akbar, with his office in the Secretariat of the Prime Minister. "I checked the modified business rules until August 19, 2019 and discovered that it does not mention the ARU," the lawyer argued, adding that he does not know the date on which the ARU was formed, except that it was created after the appeal of apex court of suo motu notification against Pakistanis holding foreign accounts without disclosure
Plaintiff Abdul Waheed Dogar was contacted to find out the evidence and his motivation, although he had no evidence of the allegations. The entire collection of evidence had begun even when the complaint had not reached the prime minister's desk, the lawyer said.
The president of FBR marked a consultation to conduct an analysis of the extraterritorial assets of the members of the judiciary. Nadra's database was reviewed, the lawyer said, and that the travel history that the FIA sent to the ARU president about Justice Isa was sent on May 10.
All this information had been obtained before May 10 and all these letters were only the creation of a paper trail, he said. Until April 16, the reference had not been submitted to the prime minister, the cabinet or the president for approval, he argued. The ARU president wrote a letter to the FBR president to obtain confidential information against the judge, he added, claiming that the exact address of the London properties was obtained through surveillance.
When Judge Bandial observed that he had verified the laws related to income tax and money laundering, the lawyer replied that the government was applying NAO Section 9 (4) against Justice Isa. The lawyer also cited certain tweets and stories published in newspapers, as well as the May 30 press conference of the special information assistant, Dr. Firdous Ashiq Awan, and alleged that a calculated defamation campaign and a media trial were launched against your customer. Until then, the SJC had not issued any justified cause notice to Judge Isa, the lawyer recalled.
At first, lead lawyer Hamid Khan requested the SC to postpone the proceedings in view of the October 31 elections of the Supreme Court of Lawyers. However, the attorney general opposed the idea and said that an individual lawyer can argue his case in court.
Posted on Dawn, October 29, 2019
Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1513492/sc-judge-questions-legality-of-probe-into-faez-isas-properties