ISLAMABAD, Aug 28: The Supreme Court reserved on Tuesday its judgment on a petition moved by Dr Arsalan Iftikhar, son of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, seeking review of the court’s June 14 order which asked the attorney general to handle the controversy relating to allegations of a Rs342 million business deal between Dr Arsalan and property tycoon Malik Riaz.

“We will announce the verdict in a day or two after consulting each other,” Justice Jawwad S. Khwaja, who heads a two-judge bench, said before closing the arguments.

In his petition, Dr Arsalan challenged the court order which, he claimed, contained inherent and apparent errors.

On the directives of the attorney general, a joint investigation team (JIT) headed by Director General of NAB’s Financial Crimes Investigation Wing Kauser Iqbal Malik was formed to look into the matter.

On Tuesday, Advocate Sardar Muhammad Ishaq, representing Dr Arsalan, requested the court to order the transfer of the case from NAB to any other independent agency or commission which should carry out the inquiry without any influence from Malik Riaz and the federal government. “This will ensure transparency and fairness,” he said, adding that his client had no faith in the NAB inquiry.

When Advocate Ishaq requested the court to appoint a judge for the inquiry, Justice Hussain said if the counsel did not trust anyone should the court call someone from abroad.

Advocate Zahid Bokhari, representing Malik Riaz, opposed the idea of constituting a commission to look into the allegations.

But Justice Khawaja recalled that during the initial hearings the counsel himself had supported the idea of a commission similar to the one appointed to investigate the infamous memo scandal. He stressed the need for a transparent investigation into the matter.

Advocate Ishaq alleged that NAB had become controversial under the present chairman who was acting on the orders of people who had committed corruption and were involved in corrupt practices. He accused Malik Riaz of enjoying a lot of clout in Islamabad and said the NAB chairman was biased and prejudiced.

The counsel said allegations against his client were mala fide. He said the attorney general did not live up to the trust because he had hidden the fact that he had been the counsel for Malik Riaz. Besides, he alleged, NAB was not maintaining its independence in the probe and was being controlled and supervised by the attorney general.

Advocate Ishaq said the NAB chairman appeared to be totally confused because it was not clear whether he had actually opened the inquiry under the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999 or simply initiated the probe to ascertain whether the facts before him made out an offence under the ordinance.

Deputy Attorney General Shafi Chandio said allegations against the AG were unfounded and incorrect because he did nothing against the chief justice except highlighting Article 4 of the Code of Conduct for Judges as a result of which the chief justice stepped down from the present hearing.

“This way the AG saved the chief justice from being scandalised or ridiculed in terms of his office,” he said, adding that whatever the AG did was in pursuance of the court’s order which was clear from the contents of his letter requesting the NAB chairman to send fortnightly progress report because the apex court itself desired that the AG would set the machinery of the state into motion.

Moreover, he said, the name of NAB was also mentioned in the court’s order, adding that the AG did not suggest any name to be included in the JIT.