Govt team will meet Shahbaz to get his support for military courts

ISLAMABAD: A two-member government team will be meeting Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif to muster his support for the approval of the constitutional amendment for extension of military courts.

“The government has approached us expressing its intention to have a session with Shahbaz Sharif by Federal Ministers Shah Mehmood Qureshi and Pervaiz Khattak,” a senior opposition leader told The News.

Former Speaker and top Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) stalwart said that the opposition has told the government side that it is ready for talks with Shahbaz Sharif or at any other level. “We will see what the government has to present before us for discussion.”

On Tuesday, opposition representatives had a meeting with Speaker Asad Qaisar on the latter’s invitation to discuss the unfolding of the mini-budget in the National Assembly on Wednesday. “We want the Parliament to function and will be positive when the finance minister will unfold the budget,” Ayaz Sadiq said. “We want the ruling party to come down the container and deliver.”

The opposition parties have formed two committees including representatives of their partners. One of them will deal with matters that the Speaker wants to talk about while the other will hold dialogue with the government on different issues if the other side wishes.

Meanwhile, the consultations between the government and opposition parties on amending the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) and introducing new laws are totally stalled.

“Six weeks back, we had discussions on the proposed changes in the NAO, and other proposed laws but since then we haven’t heard anything from the government,” Ayaz Sadiq said. On their part, he said, the opposition parties have made it clear that they will support any amendments or fresh legislation only if they are convinced that these initiatives will be for people’s welfare and interest. “But the dilemma is that we have nothing before us on which we can give our opinion.”

In the previous meetings, the two sides had also discussed significant reduction of the maximum physical remand period of ninety days. The government plans to make at least three amendments in the NAO that the Supreme Court has recommended. One of them is grant of power to accountability courts to give bail to the accused, arraigned under the NAO. The second amendment pertains to changing thirty days’ period to conclude trial by such courts. The third change relates to amending the voluntary return (VR) provision.

Justice Asif Saeed Khosa recommended in a judgment released in mid-November that in the changed scenario, the legislature may, if so advised, consider amending the NAO appropriately so as to enable an accused person to apply for bail before the relevant accountability court in the first instance. Obviously, the accused will go to the high court and subsequently to the Supreme Court, if he remains aggrieved in this connection.

Justice Khosa wrote that the intention behind introduction of Section 9 (b) of the NAO, which ousted the jurisdiction of the superior courts regarding grant of bail, already stood neutralized due to opening of the door for bail through exercise of constitutional jurisdiction of a high court.

Resultantly, he noted, the entire burden was being shouldered by the high courts, which was an unnecessary drain on their precious time.

He said the high courts and the Supreme Court had always felt difficulty in adjusting the requirements of “without lawful authority” and “of no legal effect” relevant to a writ of certiorari [Article 199(1)(a)(ii) of the Constitution] with the requirements of bail provided in Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The judge also recommended revision of the unrealistic timeframe [thirty days] for conclusion of a trial as specified in Section 16(a). It has never happened that an accountability court decided a reference within thirty days.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed has heard a case for interpretation of Section 25-A of the NAO, which empowers the NAB chairman to accept VR from an accused, who is even allowed to continue his job without departmental proceedings. If the appropriate amendment is not done, the court will give its ruling and it has jurisdiction to strike down any law, violating the Constitution, the panel said.

Justice Azmat Saeed said a crime cannot end through an administrative order and an offence cannot be abolished on approval of VR. The judge noted that the NAB writes letter to the accused persons regarding VRs after initiating inquiries.