The Supreme Court Rejects Objections to Hearing Pleas on Audio Leaks Commission
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday rejected the previous PDM government’s objections to the five-member bench hearing a set of pleas challenging the constitution of a three-judge commission set up to probe veracity of audio leaks that had implicated politicians as well as judges of the top court and their family members.
Objections Declared an Attack on the Independence of the Judiciary
Justice Ijazul Ahsan announced the short order, saying that the objections were “an attack on the independence of the judiciary”. The SC five-member larger bench had earlier reserved its decision on the government’s objections.
Background of the Commission
The previous coalition government had formed the commission on May 20 under Section 3 of the Pakistan Commission of Inquiry Act 2017. Led by senior puisne judge Justice Isa, the commission also comprised Balochistan High Court Chief Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Aamer Farooq.
Restraining the Panel
On May 26, the top court had restrained the panel from going ahead with its task. The verdict was issued by the five-member bench hearing the case.
Set of Petitions
The order was passed on a set of petitions moved by Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Abid Shahid Zuberi, SCBA Secretary Muqtedir Akhtar Shabbir, PTI Chairman Imran Khan and Advocate Riaz Hanif Rahi seeking to declare the constitution of the audio commission illegal.
PDM Government’s Request for Recusal
Subsequently, the government-appointed commission decided to put its proceedings on hold until the SC decided the petitions.
However, the PDM government sought the reconstitution of the five-member bench — led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Shahid Waheed — hearing the pleas against the formation of the commission.
In its application, the PDM government had asked CJP Bandial, Justice Ahsan, and Justice Akhtar to distance themselves from the bench since “rules of natural justice” demanded that the “adjudicator should be impartial”.
Verdict and Allegations
A detailed verdict, authored by CJP Bandial, was issued in the afternoon. The judgement stated that the objections raised by the government were fanciful and motivated to delay the decision. It also reflected on the previous government’s treatment of the court and its judges.
The order said that the application filed by the federal government was declared to be “devoid of merit and legal force”. The recusal application was dismissed as an attack on the independence of the judiciary.
