ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) was informed on Wednesday that Abdul Waheed Dogar who filed a complaint against Justice Qazi Faez Isa was just a too bit proxy as the government already has knowledge of the foreign properties of the petitioner’s spouse.
A ten-member full court headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial resumed hearing into the identical petitions, challenging the Presidential Reference filed against Justice Qazi Faez Isa for allegedly not disclosing his foreign properties in his wealth returns.
Other members of the bench are Justice Maqbool Baqir, Justice Manzoor Ahmed Malik, Justice Faisal Arab, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Muhammad Qazi Amin Ahmed.
Munir A Malik, counsel for Justice Qazi Faez Isa continued his arguments. During the course of hearing, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel asked the qualification of the complainant Abdul Waheed Dogar.
Munir A Mlaik replied that he was just a too bit proxy, adding that the complaint was treated with so much importance as the Asset Recovery Unit (ARU) and the Minister for Law already knew about the foreign properties of the spouse of the petitioner. The counsel said that ARU Chairman Shahzad Akbar met Abdul Waheed Dogar, the complainant and gave him online details of the properties of the spouse of the petitioner. Thay’s why Dogar only pin-pointed the properties but failed to give any documentary evidence.
If such a complaint was received by the Supreme Judicial Council or the President, it must have been thrown into the dustbin”, Munir A Malik contended adding that instead of filing the complaint with the President, Dogar filed it with the Asset Recovery Unit (ARU).
Meanwhile, the learned counsel informed the court that the first phase of his arguments came to an end and now he will be starting the second phase.
“I will be focusing in the second phase on the subject of mala fide and will submit as to how this reference was filed against the petitioner judge on the basis of mala fide”, Munir A Malik submitted. Similarly, he said that he will be arguing as to why this reference which is based on mala fide should be quashed by giving facts in details but before that, he said that he will try to answer the questions, put by Justice Yahya Afridi.
Justice Umar Ata Bandial told the counsel that besides arguing, the counsel should submit its formulations in writing before the court. Raza Rabbani former Chairman Senate and counsel for Sindh Bar Council told the court that he will be arguing before the court on Clause 5 of Article 209 of the constitution. Hmaid Khan, counsel for Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) also told the court that he will be arguing in the instant matter. Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing till December 16.