ISLAMABAD: Minister for Finance Ishaq Dar on Monday challenged in the Supreme Court its verdict, delivered on July 28 directing the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to file a reference against him for possessing assets and funds beyond his known sources of income.
The finance minister filed the review petition under Article 188 of the Constitution through his counsel Dr Tariq Hassan. He also prayed to the apex court that the direction in the impugned judgment and final order to file a reference against him be stayed till the final orders on his review petition besides dismissing the petition of PTI chief Imran Khan.
A five-member larger bench of the apex court headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa on July 28 disqualified former prime minister Nawaz Sharif for not being honest under the law and ordered the NAB to file references against him and the members of his family.
The court had also ordered filing of reference against Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, respondent No 10 for possessing assets and funds beyond his known sources of income. The court ruled that the assets of Ishaq Dar had increased 91 time (from Rs9.11 million to Rs831.70 million) within short span of time.
Ishaq Dar made PTI Chief Imran Khan, National Accountability Bureau (NAB) chairman and Federation of Pakistan through Law and Justice Division secretary, Interior secretary and Federal Bureau of Revenue (FBR) chairman as respondents.
In his review petition, Ishaq Dar contended that the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) self evidently exceeded its mandate by opining on whether or not his assets were disproportionate to his known sources of income and this august court had regrettably erred in law, an error floating on the surface of the record, in passing a direction for a NAB reference against him on the basis of the JIT report that was beyond its mandate as per this court order dated April 20, 2017.
He submitted that as evident from his wealth reconciliation statement filed on July 17, 2017, his net assets were Rs9.11 million on June 30, 1993 and rose to Rs831.70 million as on June 30, 2009.
“It is a moot point whether a period of 16 years can be considered as short span of time,” Dar contended. He said that the amplitude of powers conferred by Article 184(3) for enforcement of fundamental rights could not be expanded to negate or whittle down his fundamental rights under Articles, 4, 9, 10-A, 14 and 25 of the Constitution or to reduce the powers of NAB under Section 18 of its Ordinance to a nullity.
The finance minister contended that arguments on the JIT report were heard by three judges of the apex court only while the impugned final order had been passed by five-member bench including two who never heard arguments on the report and considered his objections relating thereto.
It is submitted with respect that passing of the impugned final order by a bench including two judges who did not hear the entire case vitiated the impugned final order in its entirety, Ishaq Dar submitted.
He further contended that the impugned judgment and final order of the court of July 28, 2017 insofar as it pertained to overseeing the investigation by an honorable judge of the apex court is violation of Articles 175(2) and (3) and 203 and other provisions of the Constitution.
