ISLAMABAD:The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned hearing till February 7, on a petition filed by PTI’s chairman Imran Khan challenging the amendments in NAB laws. Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial remarked that the debate in the court was about the changing of the intention of the crime. Whatever the punishment is, a crime remains a crime, he said.
The CJP remarked that the principles of honesty and dishonesty were clear in Quran, and it had used strict words against dishonest. The NAB used to prepare cases pertaining the public property, he said.
Counsel for federal government Makhdom Ali Khan argued that the Parliament would not need to prove its authority for legislation. The court had to tell that why such NAB amendments could not be made if these were terminated, he said.
He said that a law could only be terminated if it was contradicting the constitution. The legislation to reduce the powers of judiciary could be dismissed, he said.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah asked that whether abolishing of death sentence would be a constitutional act. If the act of house to abolish NAB law could be challenged and the court could restore the institution, he questioned.
Justice Shah said that the court could view the laws in perspective of constitution and basic human rights. Whether the court could view the laws as per the perspectives of shariat, he asked.
Makhdom Ali Khan said that the Parliament was also authorized to withdraw its legislation. He said that the death penalty could not be awarded in Britain in any case, adding that this law was also applied in the pending cases. He said that the Britain did not sign agreements for exchange of prisoners with those countries where death sentence was still intact.
He said that the only federal shariat court could view the matters in perspective of shariat, adding that NAB amendments could not be viewed in this context.
The all accountability laws were always used to be applied from the past thus applying the recent amendments on previous cases was not a strange act, he added.
Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan remarked that whether a legislation could be introduced in contradiction of Islamic laws. The death penalty existed in Islamic rules, he added.
Justice Ahsan remarked that as per the petitioner, accountability was the basic ingredient of Islam and constitution.
The further hearing of the case was then adjourned till February 7.