Haj corruption: Supreme Court displeased over FIA probe

The Supreme Court on Friday expressed displeasure over the investigation into the Haj corruption scandal by Federal Investigation Agency (FIA). A six-member larger bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, which was hearing Haj corruption case, issued show cause notices to DG FIA and two officers who were reportedly separated themselves from the investigation into the scandal.
Issuing show-cause notices to DG FIA Iqbal Malik, Additional Director General (ADG) Javed Ali and Director Hussain Asghar, the court directed them to submit their replies by May 27. Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Maulvi Anwar-ul-Haq apprised the court that a summary had been sent to the prime minister for bringing back Javed Bukhari and Hussain Asghar, who were earlier removed from the investigations of the case.
During the course of hearing, Secretary establishment Chaudhary Abudl Rauf told that the court that the prime minister could not sign the summary due to his busy schedule in the aftermath of Abbottabad incident. When Secretary establishment tried to shift the blame of transferring FIA officials on interior ministry, Chief Justice remarked DG FIA was responsible for it.
FIA produced record in the court according to which Hussain Asghar and Javed Bukhari had themselves requested be separated from the investigation. The Chief Justice observed that the director general FIA was responsible for the transfers and the court would ask him as to why he tried to impede the court's proceedings and why an action was not taken against former state minister for religious affairs Shagufta Jumani, when a statement of getting kick backs was recorded against her.
The FIA director legal Azam Khan informed the court that Saudi government did not provide concrete evidence against Shagufta Jumani. The CJP remarked that Saudi Arabia was not a country where everything was handed over to others. The Chief Justice said that whenever some headway was made in the investigations of the case, interference began. "Whenever probe initiated against an influential man, officials are transferred," he observed. Later, the hearing of the case was adjourned till June 03.