0
ISLAMABAD: Former law minister Babar Awan filed in the Supreme Court on Saturday an application seeking permission to represent the federal government in the politically explosive petition seeking review of the court’s judgment holding illegal the controversial National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO).
Filed under Order 26 Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules 1980, the plea said the proceedings in the matter were “tainted with malice” because Dr Mobashir Hassan who had originally challenged the NRO in the Supreme Court did not represent the Pakistan People’s Party while Roedad Khan, another petitioner, allegedly headed an election cell set up by military ruler Ziaul Haq to keep former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto away from the election process.
About Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif, another petitioner, the plea said he was a fierce political opponent of the PPP.
A full-court of the Supreme Court comprising all 17 judges will resume the hearing of the NRO review petition on Monday. The bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry comprises Justices Mian Shakirullah Jan, Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Nasir-ul-Mulk, Muhammad Sair Ali, Jawwad S. Khwaja, Anwar Zaheer Jamali, Khilji Arif Hussain, Tariq Parvez, Mian Saqib Nisar, Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Amir Hani Muslim, Ejaz Afzal Khan, Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, Gulzar Ahmed and Muhammad Athar Saeed.
The court had on numerous occasions adjourned the matter for want of a new counsel to plead the NRO case which has always put the government in a tight corner since its hearing entails simultaneous overseeing of the implementation of the court judgment which involves communicating with Swiss authorities for reopening money laundering cases against President Asif Ali Zardari. The government insists that the president enjoys immunity from prosecution.
In his petition, Dr Awan argued that any judgment of the apex court in the absence of the government’s counsel would be considered ex-parte and would not meet the ends of justice. “In the interest of justice and fair play, it will be appropriate that a proper opportunity of hearing be granted to the federal government through the counsel of its own choice. The right to engage a counsel of its own choice is an inalienable right guaranteed by the Constitution.”
In the present scenario, Dr Awan said, there was none to represent the government in the review petition. The apex court, he recalled, had observed that courts were always interested to decide the matter on merits instead of withholding the relief on technicalities.
During the proceedings of this case, Dr Awan recalled, Attorney General Maulvi Anwarul Haq being the chief law officer had been asked by the court to argue the case, but he excused because he was not attorney general at the time when the matter was argued and decided.
On April 14, the federal government had moved an application seeking the court’s approval to replace its counsel Latif Khan Khosa, who was nominated as governor of Punjab that time, with Dr Khalid Ranjha.
But the court asked Advocate-on-Record Raja Abdul Ghafoor to argue the case if the respondents were not willing to allow Barrister Kamal Azfar, who had moved the review plea, to continue with the case.
Raja Ghafoor recently expressed his inability to represent the government because of his indisposition. Consequently, the government withdrew his nomination as advocate-on-record.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court office has made special security arrangements for the proceedings. Special passes will be issued for entry into the courtroom No 1. The entry will be allowed after checking/frisking and searching of bags/purses.
