Viewpoint
ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his children have engaged a renowned team of lawyers to represent them in the Supreme Court in a slew of petitions relating to the offshore companies.
A common trait of three new attorneys is that they confine their arguments and assertions to the courtroom and bunk off pressers about the judicial proceedings they have been part of minutes ago. They skirt public campaigning to project their case.
So, now there is a new bench that will hear the old petitions in the new year with a new quad of lawyers for the defendants.
Former Attorney General and eminent constitutional expert Makhdoom Ali Khan will stand for the premier. He had also worked closely with Pervez Musharraf’s regime. Regardless of his past affiliation, he is a reputed senior advocate, who has appeared in a large number of high profile cases.
Noted lawyer Shahid Hamid will speak for Maryam and her spouse Capt (retd) Safdar. He is brother of Federal Law Minister Zahid Hamid, who is also a leading attorney.
He was appointed as the governor of Punjab by the then President Farooq Leghari. They were dear friends as they belonged to the famous 1964 batch of the Central Superior Services (CSS). Both later left the civil service to pursue different careers one in politics and other as lawyer.
Before being named as the Punjab governor, Shahid Hamid had filed a presidential reference against the then Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, representing President Leghari just two days after the murder of Mir Murtaza Bhutto in a police shootout on September 20, 1996.
Advocate Salman Akram Raja will speak for Hussain in the top court. He has to his credit appearing in a plethora of important cases in superior courts. The most significant among was the petition filed in the apex court by Dr Mubashir Hassan against the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) issued by Musharraf after a deal with the Pakistan People’s Party. The Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry had struck this amnesty law down, reviving thousands of criminal and corruption cases that had been withdrawn under the NRO.
Ex-Attorney General Salman Aslam Butt will stand for Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, who is hardly concerned with the case but has been made a party in the PTI petition.
While Makhdoom Ali Khan and Shahid Hamid absolutely stay away from TV talk shows, Salman Akram Raja frequently features in them to give his legal opinion, which is always realistic and balanced.
On the other hand, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan, one of the main petitioners, is content with continuing with his previous team of lawyers led by Naeem Bokhari. He had earlier removed Hamid Khan, advocate, as his lead attorney.
However, after consecutive failures to present even an iota of convincing evidence before the apex court against the prime minister and his children, Imran Khan has again come out with his usual high-sounding claim of getting hold of credible documentary proofs, just a day before the court resumes hearing after over three weeks.
This is part of his time-tested policy to try to influence and pressurize the court by offering ‘evidence’ outside of the courtroom while inside it his lawyers are always devoid of any plausible documents. As the court will continue proceedings for any number of days, Imran Khan will remain engaged in campaigning as per his standard practice because he is more obsessed with fighting such cases at the public level. In this connection, he has already planned three rallies in Hangu, Bahawalpur and Dera Ghazi Khan till the middle of this month.
Since a new bench has been formed by the new Chief Justice, Mian Saqib Nisar, it will hold hearing totally afresh. Previously, it was headed by the then Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, who retired on Dec 30. Justice Asif Saeed Khosa leads this panel.
Justice Ejaz Afzal and Justice Gulzar Ahmed have been inducted in the new bench in place of Jamali and Justice Amir Hani Muslim while Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed and Justice Ijazul Ahsan have been retained as its members.
On the last date of hearing on Dec 9, the earlier bench wanted to form a judicial commission but couldn’t after the PTI’s threat to boycott it. The PTI had urged the bench to take a decision on the petitions. On the contrary, the defendants had left it to the judges to either decide the case themselves or set up a judicial commission.
While winding up the day’s proceedings on the last hearing, Sheikh Azmat Saeed had observed that the petitioners have disappointed the bench. The panel wanted to constitute a one-man commission comprising the Supreme Court judge saying that it has not got the sufficient evidence to reach a conclusion. It had remarked that only a commission can go into details about the matter to prepare a report for the bench for a decision.