ISLAMABAD: In reaction to the National Accountability Bureau’s NAB quash notices summon to former first girl Bushra Bibi’s near pal Farah Khan, propose Muhammad Azhar Siddique asked the anti-graft watchdog to quash the call-up notices, pointing out that NAB had did not set up its jurisdiction.
In a response to the bureau’s director general, extra director, and deputy director, the counselor said that the call-up notices ought to be canceled in mild of “facts, extraordinary situations and judgments exceeded with the aid of using the advanced courts of Pakistan.”
Advocate Siddique said that the call-up notices had been issued to a number of his customers thru the media, deeming the practice “odd”.
He claimed that this “in a flip system that, technically, a be conscious of most convenient one or days, has been given with the aid of utilizing your workplace,” blaming the NAB quash notices of unwell aim, mala fide, and a concocted schedule main towards political victimization.
He furthered that suitable jurisdiction had now no longer been hooked up withinside the belongings past approach case towards Farah Khan as her husband Ahsan Iqbal Jamil and Chaudhry Majeed, together with 19 others, had been summoned.
The counselor said that Farah become a non-public citizen and had by no means held a workplace, as folks that had been summoned had been personnel at Ghousia Builders Private Limited.
“The aforementioned entity is a non-public company, therefore, the identical has no relation with any public workplace holder or public entity, whatsoever. It is vital to say herein that to make out the case, we hereby country that the jurisdiction of NAB quash notices, as stipulated below NAO [National Accountability Ordinance],
Is exactly restricted to the volume of personal men and women such as our customers as they may be non-public men and women, hence, NAB quash notices lacks jurisdiction to problem any call-up be aware to the identical in any manner, whatsoever,” study the statement.
The proposal in addition criticized the anti-graft watchdog, accusing them of pursuing a case primarily based totally on “assumption, concocted end with none foundation or stable foundations.”
Siddique claimed that the notices issued had been a “planned try to undermine and dodge the authority and jurisdiction supplied to the applicable institutions.”
Farah Khan’s attorney lambasted NAB quash notices, claiming that such notices had been neither permissible below NAO nor the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 and “violate the essential standards of regulation that the govt motion can not undo the prison authority supplied below the legislature instruments.”
Siddique furthered that the responsibility ordinance calls for “menswear” [criminal intent] to be hooked up, past an inexpensive doubt, earlier than recommending any motion. “Noticeably, on this case, NAB quashes notices seems to be unaware and unaware of the legal procedures of the land,” he wrote.
He in addition harassed that the ordinance calls for the NAB’s chairman to take a “reasoned decision” that it’d be “proper” and “just” to continue in addition and he ought to be happy that there may be enough fabric to be had on record, which could justify the submitting of the reference earlier than the responsibility court.
Highlighting the words “just” and “justified”, the counselor remarked that such clauses suggest that the regulation calls for the chairman to “now no longer handiest act in an “affordable manner” in phrases of Section 24-A of the General Clauses Act, 1897 however additionally to act “lawfully” with the aid of using.
Articles four and five of the Constitution and now no longer to undermine the hooked up precept laid down with the aid of using the Superior Courts and now no longer to violate the precept of herbal justice and, especially, the provisions of Article 10-A of the Constitution; the proper to an honest trial and due technique of regulation.”
In mild of the “facts” offered with the aid of using the council, the NAB become accused of, “with no doubt”, functioning in an “unholy haste… in sheer violation of due technique and proper of an honest trial.
” Siddique brought that the watchdog had no problem with an in-depth questionnaire, which the customers are certain to respond, “[the questionnaire] have to were fashionable first organizing the jurisdiction.”
Therefore, the bureau has been asked to quash/cancel the aforementioned be aware on July 7, 2022, on the premise that it had now no longer hooked up its jurisdiction withinside the count earlier than intending in addition.
“It is pertinent that or not it’s hooked up that your workplace has jurisdiction to provoke an inquiry towards the stated non-public men and women… withinside the hobby of justice, equity, and honest play,” study the reaction.