ISLAMABAD: The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the parliament is divided over the issue of taking up the case of Supreme Court (SC) judge Justice Mazahar Ali Naqvi, who is facing allegations of keeping assets beyond means, Dawn has learnt.

The resentment within the PAC members, including those belonging to the ruling coalition, came to the surface at a time when the National Assembly Secretariat has already issued notices to them for a meeting scheduled to be held on Monday (tomorrow) to take up the case against the SC judge.

The matter had been referred to the PAC by Deputy Speaker Zahid Akram Durrani on the demand of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader and federal minister Sardar Ayaz Sadiq during the National Assembly’s sitting on May 4 with the directive to come up with a report within 15 days.

The PML-N leader had raised the issue on a point of order during the Question Hour as lawmakers continued their assault on the superior court judges in the wake of ongoing executive-judiciary tussle over the issue of elections to the Punjab Assembly.

Registrar already summoned on May 16 over alleged failure of apex court to audit its accounts in last 10 years

Headed by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) dissident Noor Alam Khan, the PAC has already summoned the SC registrar on May 16 over the alleged failure of the apex court to audit its accounts in the last 10 years.

When contacted, a number of PAC members stated that they believed that the case of the SC judge did not fall in the domain of the PAC and if the government had any evidence against a judge, it should properly file a reference against him in the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).

“This is not the domain of the PAC. The Constitution provides a mechanism for the judges’ accountability through the SJC,” said PML-N Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed while talking to Dawn.

The PML-N senator said the government should not repeat the same mistake committed by the previous PTI regime which had moved a similar reference against Justice Qazi Faiz Isa and which backfired. He said they should simply follow the constitution, instead of setting new and wrong precedents.

Similarly, Dr Ramesh Kumar of the PTI said he had already discussed the matter with a number of PAC members and some of them were of the view that taking up the individual cases did not fall in their domain. He, however, said there were many members in the 28-member PAC, who believed that they could take up the matter as it was related to the financial benefits which the judges were availing through the national exchequer.

Dr Kumar said if there was any wrongdoing in the tax returns of the judge, the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) should intimate the cabinet, which could then recommend formally moving a reference against that judge in the SJC.

Senator Saleem Mandviwala of Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) also said it was not the domain of the PAC to take up individual cases. The job of the PAC, according to Mr Mandviwala, was only to examine the audit reports sent to it by the auditor general of Pakistan.

Mr Mandviwala said he might not be able to attend the Monday’s meeting, but would convey it to the PAC chairman that they should refer the case to some other department.

It may be recalled that while raising the issue in the National Assembly, Mr Sadiq had stated that various bar councils had already filed references with the SJC against Justice Naqvi, adding such allegations were tarnishing the image of judiciary.

Mr Sadiq, who served as speaker of the National Assembly under the previous PML-N government, had said the PAC should seek assistance from the FBR and the Accountant General Pakistan Aevenue to probe the matter.

He said the investigation must find out sources of the judge’s income “to purchase a plot worth over Rs100 million and carrying out construction on it.” Besides conducting special audit of the matter, he added, the FBR should be asked to also provide details of taxes paid by the judge.

The minister said it was unfortunate that people were pointing fingers at judges of superior courts because of such allegations, adding the proposed investigation would provide an opportunity to the judge to come clean on the matter.

The deputy speaker referred the matter to the PAC for investigation and audit under Rule 199 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the National Assembly 2007 with the directive to complete the task within 15 days.

Rule 199, ‘Reference to Standing Committee’ reads: “Except as otherwise provided in these rules, the Assembly or the Speaker may remit to the standing committee any subject or matter with which it is concerned and the standing committee shall study such subject or matter with a view to suggest legislation or making recommendations to the Assembly.”

Four references are pending against Justice Naqvi in the SJC in which he has been accused of “misconduct”, “misuse of authority” and keeping assets beyond known sources of income.

Published in Dawn, May 7th, 2023