ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday sought a concise statement from the federal government over the five names rejected by the President, forwarded by Prime Minister, for filling the slot of prosecutor general in National Accountably Bureau (NAB) that has been vacant since November 2017.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, questioned why the President rejected the summary, observing that he is bound to act upon advice of the Prime Minister. On last hearing, the government assured the court that new prosecutor general in NAB would soon be appointed.
On Monday, however, Additional Attorney General Waqar Rana informed the court that the names sent by chairman NAB for appointment of prosecutor general in the anti-graft body were returned by the President.
He informed the court that the President has rejected fives names including Justice (R) Fasihul Mulk, Mudassar Khalid Abbassi, Syed Asghar Haider, Shah Khawar and Nasir Saeed Sheikh. After the NAB chairman, these names were recommended by the Prime Minister.
The law officer further appraised the court that after rejecting the five names, the President in return recommended a panel of three names including Waqar Hasan Mir, Chaudhry Mohammad Ramzan and Najeeb Faisal Chaudhry for the vacancy.
Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar inquired as to whether the President has the powers to reject the names, forwarded by the Prime Minister. Waqar Rana replied that President is bound to act upon the advice of the Prime Minister or Cabinet as provided under Article 48 of the Constitution and at the most, the return of the summary may be treated as referring of the matter for reconsideration of advice, forwarded by the Prime Minister or Cabinet.
Waqar Rana, however, submitted that Under Section 8 (1) (a) of NAB Ordinance 1999, the President is to appoint prosecutor general with the consultation of NAB chairman.
The learned law officer further submitted that previously, summary was forwarded by the Law and Justice Division as provided under Rules of Business 1973 and the NAB chairman was consulted.
“The consultation, though not binding, must be meaningful and purposive because it relates to a public office”, Waqar Rana added. Meanwhile, the court summoned Secretary Law Karamat Hussain Niazi, who came and shared a file containing the President’s rejection to explain the delay in implementation of the SC order.
The court observed that under the law the President is bound to take the PM’s advice. The court noted that although the President can send files back for reconsideration, he cannot reject them. Chief Justice wondered as to how the President can reject the names recommended by the Prime Minister?
Additional Prosecutor NAB recalled to the court that last week, the attorney general had assured the court that new prosecutor general would be appointed in a week. Meanwhile, the court directed secretary law to file a concise statement over the matter and adjourned further hearing until January 24.
