SC judges are anticipating the World Cup semifinal game.
CJ provides government attorneys with a big screen outside that can be set up to watch the game.
ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial stated that he was anticipating “getting good news” from the cricket team at a Supreme Court bench’s Tuesday celebration of the T20 World Cup semifinal between Pakistan and New Zealand.
When a three-judge panel led by Chief Justice Bandial was discussing a plea filed by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) against recent changes to the National Accountability Ordinance, the subject of a cricket game came up (NAO).
At the conclusion of the session, government attorney Makhdoom Ali Khan urged the supreme court to postpone scheduling the next hearing until after Pakistan’s World Cup semifinal match against New Zealand. For him, Pakistan making it to the semifinals was nothing short of a miracle.
The chief justice smiled at this and asked the attorney when the semifinal game would take place. The top justice promised the attorney, “If you ask, we’ll put up a screen outside the Supreme Court so you can watch the game.” The team, he continued, should have “excellent news.”
The PTI leader’s attorney, Khwaja Haris, disagreed with the government attorney’s plea, arguing that enough time had passed. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah informed Haris that there was just one day while seated on the bench. The chief justice said that more hearings would take place on Wednesday and would end early.
Justice Ijazul Ahsan, who was seated behind the bench, remarked that it was quite miraculous that the Pakistani cricket team made it thus far. When Justice Mansoor Ali Shah instructed PTI attorney Khawaja Haris, “If you don’t mind, you will present arguments [and] we will watch the match,” the courtroom erupted in laughter.
Read the FIR for the assault on Imran filed following the SC’s ultimatum.
Haris submitted his arguments for the petition earlier in the day. He made reference to a UN resolution Pakistan has ratified against corruption. The most recent legal amendments, he continued, would go against the resolution.
But Justice Shah questioned whether legislation by parliament could be stopped by a global agreement. Justice Ahsan questioned why favouritism was displayed in accordance with the new NAB laws without providing an explanation. He also questioned whether anyone would intervene if bribery were permitted in the future.
The panel added that it was legal for a third party to profit from the new modifications without committing a crime. The hearing was postponed until Nov. 9 after the chief judge noted that Haris’ arguments suggested that Pakistan was a “forest” without “rule of law.”
In a different case, the bench heard the bail request of Siraj Durrani, the speaker of the Sindh Assembly, and others charged in a National Accountability Bureau (NAB) reference. The defence attorneys for the defendants withdrew the bail requests and stated that in light of the NAO revisions, they would not go before the lower courts.
If the amount at issue in the Durrani case was less than Rs. 500 million, the chief judge inquired. The amount was less, the attorney retorted. The NAB prosecutor, however, said that the sum is in the billions of rupees. According to the chief judge, the bail plea should be presented in accountability court if it can be heard there.
