ISLAMABAD: A larger bench of the Supreme Court (SC) will take up the federal government’s intra-court appeal challenging the apex court’s verdict to annul NAB law amendments today (October 31).
Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa will head the five-member bench. A three-member larger bench of the court — headed by then Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial and consisting of Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah had on September 15 by a majority of 2-1 restored corruption cases against the public office-holders after striking down some of the amendments made by the PDM government to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999, declaring it against the rights pertaining to the public interest enshrined in the Constitution.
Subsequently, the federal government filed an appeal under Section 5 of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 against the top court’s September 15 order.
The bench comprises CJP Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Amin-Ud-Din Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi. The top court has issued notices to the parties concerned.
The government has contended that by setting aside the amendments to the NAB law, the apex court moved beyond its mandate. It further contended that parliament was competent to legislate.
After the initial verdict, the NAB reopened cases against political bigwigs including the former prime ministers.
In June 2022, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan had filed a petition in the apex court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution praying for annulling the amendments for being “ultra vires to the Constitution”.
The amendments made to the NAB law including the one which limited the NAB jurisdiction to cases involving over Rs500 million and the other which allowed the accused to claim the amount of plea bargain deposited after being acquitted, were struck down by the supreme court. The judgment authored by former CJP Bandial declared the petition of PTI chairman Imran Khan as maintainable on account of violating Articles 9, 14, 24 (protection of property rights) and 25 (equality of citizens) of the Constitution and for affecting the public at large because the unlawful diversion of state resources from public development projects to private use leads to poverty, declining quality of life and injustice.
