SC summons high court’s record in appeal against Shehbaz’s travel abroad

Published May 26, 2021
This file photo shows Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shehbaz Sharif. — AFP/File
This file photo shows Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shehbaz Sharif. — AFP/File

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday summoned complete record from the Lahore High Court (LHC) and issued notices to the respondents in the federal government’s appeal against the high court’s May 7 conditional permission to former Punjab chief minister Shehbaz Sharif for his medical treatment abroad.

A two-judge Supreme Court bench, consisting of Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, took up Interior Ministry’s appeal against the high court order. The apex court observed that the record should clarify when the petition of the former chief minister was filed and when it was taken up for hearing.

The government has made Mr Sharif, Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and director general immigration and passport through the director general interior as respondents in the appeal. Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed Khan represented the government. After issuing the directions, the apex court adjourned the hearing for a week.

The court observed that the government, prima facie, appeared to be in contempt of the LHC decision that allowed the former chief minister to go abroad for medical treatment.

Apex court observes that govt, prima facie, appears to be in contempt of LHC’s decision

Justice Sajjad Ali Shah wondered how the appeal of the government could be heard when Mr Sharif had already withdrawn his application from the LHC for the implementation of its order.

The AGP contended that the high court was also seized with former chief minister’s contempt of court petition for not allowing him to fly abroad which may result in the implementation of the high court order, if accepted.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan also wondered whether the government had committed contempt of the high court, adding Mr Sharif was a parliamentarian and leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, requiring respect.

Justice Ahsan observed whether Mr Sharif really had a medical emergency that led to an urgent hearing of the case.

But the court was reminded that the former chief minister’s bail plea was rejected on medical grounds and that there was no record supporting the fact that he had a medical emergency.

The AGP said though Mr Sharif was the opposition leader and respectable, justice should be served in accordance with the law.

The AGP contended that the high court had taken the plea of Mr Sharif the same day when it was filed.

In the original petition, the Interior Ministry had pleaded that the single judge of the high court in chamber was not justified in passing the order without summoning the record, a report from the concerned departments or the authority.

The petition contended that the high court order was an order passed in violation of law.

“It is submitted with profound reluctance and regret that such orders, if allowed to remain in field, shall cause severe damage to the impartiality, integrity and reputation of the august institution of judiciary,” the petition said.

The petition said the single judge in chamber was not justified to pass ex parte mandatory order without notice to the government and to allow Mr Sharif to travel abroad as he was involved and required in many cases pending before trial courts.

It said the high court did not provide an opportunity of hearing to the government and did not grant due time for seeking instructions from the concerned departments and authority. Moreover, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) was not impleaded in the case.

Likewise, the high court judge did not consider that the respondent had also sought post-arrest bail earlier on medical grounds, but was not accepted by LHC’s full bench. Yet travel was allowed on medical grounds without questioning or examining the veracity of the assertion by the respondent.

The petition also cited the undertaking given by Mr Sharif and pleaded that the single judge in chamber ignored an earlier undertaking in which the respondent had assured the court that his brother and former prime minister Mohammad Nawaz Sharif would return within four weeks or as and when certified by doctors that he had regained his health and was fit to return to Pakistan.

Published in Dawn, May 26th, 2021

Opinion

Who bears the cost?

Who bears the cost?

This small window of low inflation should compel a rethink of how the authorities and employers understand the average household’s

Editorial

Internet restrictions
Updated 23 Dec, 2024

Internet restrictions

Notion that Pakistan enjoys unprecedented freedom of expression difficult to reconcile with the reality of restrictions.
Bangladesh reset
23 Dec, 2024

Bangladesh reset

THE vibes were positive during Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recent meeting with Bangladesh interim leader Dr...
Leaving home
23 Dec, 2024

Leaving home

FROM asylum seekers to economic migrants, the continuing exodus from Pakistan shows mass disillusionment with the...
Military convictions
Updated 22 Dec, 2024

Military convictions

Pakistan’s democracy, still finding its feet, cannot afford such compromises on core democratic values.
Need for talks
22 Dec, 2024

Need for talks

FOR a long time now, the country has been in the grip of relentless political uncertainty, featuring the...
Vulnerable vaccinators
22 Dec, 2024

Vulnerable vaccinators

THE campaign to eradicate polio from Pakistan cannot succeed unless the safety of vaccinators and security personnel...