ISLAMABAD: Special Assistant to the Prime Minister (SAPM) on Accountability Mirza Shahzad Akbar said the government had utmost respect for the superior judiciary and its decisions. SAPM Barrister Shahzad Akbar has said that the government is satisfied with the decision of the Supreme Court in the Justice Qazi Faez Isa case.
He said, "there are no winners or losers in the case," and reiterated that independence of the judiciary was of prime importance.
Akbar, while addressing a press conference, said the government would like no further discussion on the decision of the Justice Qazi Faiz Isa case. He said that whatever the detailed decision might say, it would act as a guide for them.
Akbar said the government held that the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) should be responsible for looking into matters pertaining to judges. The special assistant said that under Article 209, questions against judges could be raised in three ways.
The first is that anyone can send information to the Supreme Judicial Council. Second, the government can send a reference through the President, while the third method is the Supreme Judicial Council itself taking notice.
Akbar said, "This is neither a victory nor a defeat for anyone, it is a democratic process that takes place in any thriving democracy."
He said that all questions could be answered, but they would not, as to avoid any controversy.
He explained the short order of the apex court on Justice Qazi Faez Isa's petition, and said that now the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) would probe the properties in question, and submit a report before the SJC in a stipulated timeframe.
He also said that whatever the report reveals, it would now be looked into by the Supreme Judicial Council itself.
The report will be sent directly to the secretary of the Supreme Judicial Council, not to the government.
He emphasized that as lawyers, the respect and independence of the judiciary was of prime importance, and said that separation between the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive was essential for the supremacy of the Constitution.
Comments
Comments are closed.