ISLAMABAD, Jan 23: Notwithstanding a stay order of the Supreme Court against the appearance of its Registrar before the Public Accounts Committee, the latter urged the National Assembly on Wednesday to enforce compliance of its notice in which the committee had summoned him.

Nadeem Afzal Gondal, the PAC chairman, laid a special report before the lower house of parliament with a strong recommendation to use all ‘lawful methods’ for the compliance of its notice regarding appearance of the SC Registrar before the committee.

The PAC chairman, using rule 234 of the rules of procedure and conduct of business in the National Assembly, presented the report before the house. Rule 234 says: “A committee may, if it thinks fit, make a special report on any matter that arises or comes to light in the course of its work which it may consider necessary to bring to the notice of the Speaker or the Assembly.”

In a note of caution, however, the PAC chairman also asked the house that all efforts must be made to avoid confrontation with other state institutions and resolve the matter through debate.

The Supreme Court, in response to a set of petitions, had on Jan 1 put on hold action on PAC’s order to summon Dr Hussain on Jan 14. The stay against summoning of the Registrar came after a preliminary hearing on the set of petitions by a three-judge bench, headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, which also issued notice to Attorney General Irfan Qadir with an observation that they would like to suspend the proceedings before the PAC.

Since March 2009, the SC Registrar has repeatedly refused to appear before the committee for what the PAC said mandatory regularisation of the Supreme Court’s annual accounts.

The SC Registrar had taken the stand that Articles 78 and 81 of the Constitution clearly suggested the committee had no mandate over the Federal Consolidated Funds (FCF), out of which the administrative expenditures, including salary of judges of the Supreme Court and Islamabad High Court, were met.

The Registrar, in his response to the committee, had said that Article 68 of the Constitution put a clear bar on discussing the code of conduct of superior court judges in parliament and the administrative expenditure of the judiciary also came under it. The SC in its Jan 1 stay order upheld the argument.

The PAC throughout has contended that under the Constitution, the committee was justified in summoning the Registrar of the SC for mandatory examination of pending appropriation accounts and audit reports related to the SC. During an audience with the PAC on Oct 11, last year, former chairman of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Yasin Azad, Justice (retd) Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, a senior advocate of the SC, and Justice (retd) Tariq Mehmood had spoken in favour of the committee.

Earlier this month when the SC suspended notice of the PAC for its registrar, former president Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Asma Jehangir termed it a “self-serving judgment”.

“Not only the order will make the judiciary controversial but this also does not augur well for the future of democracy in the country,” she said while talking to Dawn.

Commenting on the laying of the report by the PAC Chairman in the house, Barrister Zafarullah Khan, an SC lawyer and constitutional expert, said once the Supreme Court had given its order, the issue couldn’t be discussed in the house.