ISLAMABAD: Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan has contended that the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999, the law that governs the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), is not applicable to the judges of superior courts and armed forces personnel.
In his reply submitted to the Supreme Court of Pakistan Sunday on PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s petition against amendments to the NAO, 1999 introduced by the last coalition government, the AGP said that a clear procedure had been laid down in the constitution to hold judges accountable. F “It would be unwise to say that under the recently introduced amendments to the NAB law, judges are the holders of public office,” he said, and added, “Under Article 209 of the constitution, this is the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) which has been given the power to take action against the judges in case of their misconduct or indiscipline. The purpose of forming the council was to ensure freedom of judiciary.”
IK’s petition: Many people were exonerated under the garb of NAO amendments: CJP
At the same time, he said that the Pakistan Army officers were not exempted from accountability either.
However, he made it clear that the NAB could not take action against them. “The procedure for holding them accountable is given in the Army Act and Army Rules,” he informed.
The AGP also objected to the admissibility of PTI Chairman’s petition for the hearing. “It is premature to hear the case in the presence of Practice and Procedure Act. Furthermore, a similar petition is pending in the Islamabad High Court,” he argued.
“According to Imran, NAB amendments have dimmed chances of the accountability of people’s representatives sitting in the parliament,” he said, adding, “While on one hand, he says that these men represent the people since they are elected by them to parliament. On the other hand, he urges his legislators to resign from their seats and bid farewell to assemblies.” AGP Awan was of the view that Imran had sinister designs which he wanted to fulfill by petitioning against the NAB amendments.
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.