ISLAMABAD: The government's counsel in Justice Faez Isa reference case Dr Farogh Naseem on Friday continued his arguments for fifth consecutive day, saying that it was a misconduct if a judge failed to give details of the assets of his wife who was his dependent or not.
During the proceedings, Justice Bandial asked Farogh Naseem to submit his arguments in written form. Justice Mansoor asked how did the rule of proximity relate to tax matters? He asked how many other agencies were formed under Rules 4 and 5 except Assets Recovery Unit (ARU). He said that he did not find any agency which was framed under these rules.
Dr Farogh Naseem responded that the rule of proximity was a fundamental one. He said it was misconduct if a judge failed to give details of the assets of his wife who was his dependent or not.
Justice Shah asked if a judge of the Supreme Court was a woman, was she obliged to give details of her husband’s assets? He remarked that the word spouse must be defined and explained.
The government’s counsel stated that this case was not primarily related to section 116 of the tax law. Dr Farogh Naseem said that he respected the judges and their integrity. He said the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) is the proper forum to ask a judge about the property of his spouse. He said according to his information, the spouse of Justice Faez Isa files tax returns. He said the tax matters don’t come under the SJC. He said that according to the Federal Shariat Court the husband and wife are very close to each other and they are patrons of each other’s property.
Farogh Naseem during arguments also cited a verse from the Holy Quran. However, the judges said the verses of the Holy Quran come under a specific pretext and that must not be linked to the case. Farogh Naseem said he is only a petitioner and he can only request the court for a particular matter.
