Senate summons AG to explain privileges to ex-CJ

ISLAMABAD: The Senate Tuesday summoned the Attorney General (AG) today (Wednesday) to present the constitutional and legal position on the high court’s judgment regarding the perks and privileges extended to ex-chief justice of the Supreme Court.
The Senate also wanted to know from the AG if it was not fundamental right of an individual to seek information under the Constitution.
The Senate Chairman Syed Nayyar Hussain Bokhari deferred the question asked by Senator Saeed Ghani about the details of pension, allowances and other fringe benefits admissible to the chief justices of the apex court.
The Senate chairman wanted to know whether or not there was also a need to amend the Constitution in order to enforce the court’s judgement or it could straight away implemented what the court ordered in its judgement.
Ghani agitated again on not being given the information, he had sought. He urged the chair to refer the matter to the concerned House committee so that it could be examined, whether or not the Constitution gave him the right to seek information.
Law Minister Senator Pervaiz Rashid told the House that his ministry had sent six messages to the Supreme Court registrar but it was a sovereign institution and could not be forced to share the information, the senator had asked about.
He noted the information obtained verbally, had been shared with the House. The minister said the Islamabad High Court had ordered provision of a bullet-proof vehicle and accordingly a Mercedez 6000cc had been provided to former chief justice and the cost of petrol and other expenditures were being borne by the government.
The minister pointed out that the government had filed an intra-court application that was pending.
On this Ghani recalled that the SC registrar was summoned by the Public Accounts Committee but he did not turn up and said that the Supreme Court was a sovereign entity. “The apex court’s sovereign is very dear to us but we are not being given reply to a question,” the senator said.
He contended a question arose here that whether or not the SC registrar was bound to share the required information with the Senate under Article-19A. He pointed out that one para had been deleted from the written reply, which was shared with the House on Friday.
The minister replied that the information shared with the ministry had been mentioned in the written answer and if the Parliament wanted to initiate any action, he had no objection in this context.
The chair observed that a paragraph had been omitted from the reply that meant that full information was not shared with the Senate. Bokhari contended that there was a need to see also Article-19A and the Fifth Schedule under which the president determined perks and privileges and also if certain benefits were extended to a judge, was it proper to extend the same to other retired judges as well.
The Senate chairman said he did not want to give his ruling today and would like to first hear the attorney general and legal experts, including Leader of Opposition Aitzaz Ahsan, Rafiq Rajwana and Babar Awan first.
The minister said that he had no objection to summoning of the attorney general while agreeing to the observation made by the chair.
In his short comment, Senator Babar Awan argued that if the state institutions were allocated funds from the Ministry of Finance, how could he believe that they were not answerable (to the Parliament) and that no state institution could be exempted from being answerable.
Senator Kazim Khan opined that the court judgement was person-specific to provide 6000cc vehicle to ex-chief justice and it was a loss to the national exchequer and contended if this facility could be extended to one ex-judge then why not to others as well.
Senators Muhammad Hamza and Zahid Khan said it was very unfortunate that a senator wanted some information and hurdle was being created in its way and asked not it breach of privilege of the House.
Later, joint opposition stormed out of the House against the proposed change in the Pak-China economic corridor and alleged the government had misled Pakistan’s traditional China about it and that without the government’s consent, Beijing could not change the route.
Senators belonging to JUI-F also joined the walk-out led by Awami National Party (ANP) lawmakers. Opposition senators said that they were not against the project or Pak-China relations but wanted restoration of the original route.
ANP Senators Muhammad Zahid Khan, Haji Muhammad Adeel and Abdul Rauf of Pakhtunkhwa Milli Awami Party from Balochistan decried the ‘change’ in the economic corridor route and dubbed it a denial of an important opportunity to bring prosperity in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan.
Senator Zahid drew the House attention towards media reports that the plan of building a coal-run power project at Gaddani had been shifted to Sialkot and an industrial zone was being planned in Salt Range, being enough proof of a change in the corridor to benefit Punjab.
He rejected the government’s contention that due to the law and order situation, a new alignment had been made in the project and noted was not there law and order and security problem in all cities, including Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad and elsewhere.
ANP lawmaker contended that the resolve of the government to fight terrorism and militancy could be gauged from a recent statement by the interior minister in the United States that they had not taken action against an Islamic cleric, as he had apologised, whereas the cleric very next day asserted to have not tendered an apology on not condemning the Peshawar school carnage.
He regretted that Pakhtoons, whether belonging to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or Balochistan were not being treated properly in Punjab and their ID cards were being torn apart and many of them being kept at police stations to be set free only after they gave extortion to the cops. “We stand by the Balochistan Assembly that has adopted a resolution for Gwadar Port control.
There is no security problem with regards to the economic corridor. We have a complaint against our own government that has misled China on the project,” said Haji Adeel, who had raised the issue on a point of order after the question hour.
Senator Abdul Rauf noted that without the consent of Pakistani government, China just could not change the corridor route. He alleged that what he had learnt as a senator was that the claim of having love for people of Balochistan was merely a lip service and asked through policies that did not serve people of his province, in which direction, the rulers wanted to take Pakistan. He regretted on one hand, rulers had been talking about insurgency and people of Balochistan taking arms against Islamabad while on the other, they continued to be denied economic and political rights.
Respoding to the senators’ concerns, the ruling PML-N Senator Rafique Rajwana proposed that the senators had every right to raise their voice for the rights of their respective provinces but the issue should not be politicised that could also undermine Pakistan’s ties with China.
He wanted the senators not to pour criticism on China and said he had no problem if the matter was referred to a committee.
Senator Dr Jehangir Badar raised the issue of closing down of his two accounts in Standard Chartered Bank in Lahore for keeping low cash in his accounts.
Federal Minister Mushahid Ullah Khan assured the House that the matter would be looked into, as this way, no account could be closed.