Opposition Aitzaz Ahsan and Rafiq Rajwana.
Aitzaz Ahsan argued while referring to Iftikhar Chaudhry that a retired judge was no more a judge and his conduct could be discussed. The House could summon and question him, he added.
He contended that the House privileges committee could summon him and called on the Senate to use its authority. “He can be summoned and asked about the privileges as these can be voluntary as well as he has been reported having said that he does not need them,” he noted.
Aitzaz, however, pointed out that the under construction nine-bed residence of the ex-CJ in Lahore was worth-seeing, who had once said he could afford marriage of his son only by obtaining HBFC loan.
He again called for authorising the House committee to summon Iftikhar Chaudhry regarding the use of privileges from the taxpayers’ money that could only be approved by the Parliament.
The PPP senator noted that the facility being provided to the ex-CJ was other than entitlement, which included the 6000cc bulletproof car, provision of 4,689 litre petrol and Rs3.37 million spent on its maintenance since January 30, 2014, reminding the perks and privileges come under the Fifth Schedule being the presidential prerogative.
When the chair asked if there was a need to amend the Constitution prior to the implementation of the court judgement, Aitzaz said that it was obligatory on the government to implement it without amending the Constitution, adding that even if it was apparently right or wrong interpretation of the law by the court, it had to be implemented.
He recalled once he went to the then chief justice with a pile of allegations against his son but perhaps, he protected his son instead of taking any action against him. On the privileges being given to the former CJ, he quoted prominent poet Amjad Islam Amjad, who says, “dil kay darya ne to ek roz otar jana hay, itna be samt na chal lot kay ghar jana hay”.
Aitzaz said the privileges being given to the ex-CJ prima facie were more than what was envisaged in the Fifth Schedule and these should be approved by the Parliament.
The chair and Farhatullah Babar questioned if it was not a fundamental right of an individual, what to tell of a senator, to see any information under Article 19-A of the Constitution, and why the Supreme Court registrar had not provided reply to a query about perks and privileges of the retired judges.
Babar recalled that Senator Ghani had also asked about the total numbers of pending cases in the high courts and the Supreme Court and it was also not answered by the courts that it amounted to interference in the judiciary.
Senator Taj Haider maintained that it was agreed that the implementation of the court’s interpretation of a law was binding on the government, but asked whether this interpretation could be person-specific or applicable to all.
The ruling PMNL-N Senator Rafiq Rajwana said the exception given to a former CJ was in violation of Article 205 of the Constitution and insisted that it should also be made part of the ICA that why the former chief justice was being given special treatment and that the law should be equal for all.
He questioned whether the Parliament, through a resolution, could call for steps to end this discrimination or not. Haji Muhammad Adeel of Awami National Party (ANP) called for summoning the former chief justice regarding the privileges he was enjoying.
Earlier, during the question hour, Minister of State Muhammad Balighur Rehman said that 19 out of 32 public sector entities approved for privatisation were profit-making entities. He added that out of the approved privatisation programme, certain entities had already been partially privatised in a transparent manner.
The minister said in response to a question, that as many as 127 world NGOs were presenting working in Pakistan and receiving foreign aid. He noted that only 19 of these had been registered while the cases of remaining NGOs were under process.
APP adds: The minister for Law informed the House in reply to the question of Saeed Ghani that since January 30, 2014 as much as 4,689 litres of petrol had been issued to the said car while a repair estimate of Rs 3,375,029 had been presented to the Law Division for which funds through a special grant were required from the Finance Division.
Earlier, replying to the question about perks and privileges of retired chief justices, the minister for Law and Justice informed the House that a chief justice of Supreme Court on his retirement is entitled to the minimum amount of the pension equal to 70 percent of salary determined by the president from time to time plus five percent for each completed year of service either as the chief justice or as the judge not exceeding the minimum amount of pension equal to 85 percent of the said salary.
He further stated that a retired chief justice of Supreme Court was also entitled to a driver and an orderly; 3,000 free local calls per month; 2,000 units of electricity; 25 hm gas per month and free supply of water.
In terms of vehicles, he said that they were also entitled to 300 litre of petrol per month; purchase of official vehicle of 1800cc at depreciated value while no income tax shall be payable in respect of benefits and perquisites to which a judge or a widow as the case may be, is entitled.