Allegations against ex-CJP Saqib Nisar: Affidavit is in London and sealed, Shamim to IHC

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Tuesday directed former chief judge Gilgit-Baltistan Rana Muhammad Shamim to submit by December 7 the original copy of the affidavit wherein he leveled allegations against former chief justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar.

Chief Justice Islamabad High Court Athar Minallah while hearing the case observed that his court is mindful of freedom of press and its independence is based on freedom of press, but there are some responsibilities on the press as well.

Attorney General Khalid Javed told the court that the role of media in this particular issue is secondary, adding that the whole responsibility rests on Rana Muhammad Shamim and he should bring the original copy of the affidavit and thereafter should be proceeded against as per law. He submitted that the court should proceed collectively against Rana Muhammad Shamim as well as the media which published his affidavit.

Justice Minallah had taken a notice of the news published in an English and Urdu newspaper by Ansar Abbasi regarding the affidavit given by Rana Muhammad Shamim. On Tuesday, in pursuance of the court’s last order, Rana Muhammad Shamim, Editor-in-Chief Jang Group Mir Shakil-ur-Rehman, Editor The News Aamir Ghauri and Ansar Abbasi were present in the courtroom. Justice Minallah inquired about all the amici curiae he had appointed in the matter on the last date of hearing. He called Rana Shamim to rostrum and asked him if he has submitted his written reply in the instant matter.

Rana Shamim submitted before the court that he could not submit his reply and his lawyer will tell the reasons for that. He informed the court that the Chehlum of his Bhabi and brother will be held in a few days. He requested the court to conduct the proceedings after December 12.

Justice Minallah told Rana Shamim to submit his written reply within five days. “Five days are sufficient for filing your reply and facing a serious issue, you will have to comply with the court order as you have caused serious aspersions not only on this court but also on its judges.” The IHC chief justice while addressing Rana Shamim said that as per the report published in the paper, he has confirmed the affidavit.

Rana Shamim replied that he was contacted after his affidavit was published and he confirmed it. Justice Minallah observed that he doesn’t believe in contempt of court, adding that these are not just contempt proceedings and judges should be made accountable. However, one should refrain from maligning this court for the sake of political narratives. He observed that they have set parameters and principles for contempt of court proceedings in Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan’s case.

Rana Shamim submitted that the affidavit was with his grandson in London and sealed but he doesn’t know how it was leaked to the media. “Did you provide it to the reporter who published it in the paper,” Justice Minallah asked Rana Shamim.

“No I did not provide it for publishing,” Rana Shamim replied, adding that he does not know which affidavit was reported by the media. "Let me have a look at the affidavit that was published," he said.

Justice Minallah asked Rana Shamim why he executed the affidavit in London and that after four years. “You have caused serious aspersions on this court, therefore, you have to justify it in your reply”, the IHC CJ told Rana Shamim.

Attorney General Khalid Javed submitted that the role of media in this particular issue is of secondary level, adding that the whole responsibility rests on Rana Shamim to justify it in his reply. “As the alleged contemnor did not disclose his affidavit to anyone, therefore, he may be directed to bring the original copy of the affidavit and thereafter he should be proceeded against as per law,” the AG said and contended that it’s not a 10 years old document, but Rana Shamim had executed it on November 10. Now he is giving a statement that he has no knowledge about the leakage of the document. “What happened some three years back, he knows but does not know about the contents of the affidavit published in media and who helped in preparing it,” the attorney general contended. He submitted that an orchestrated campaign was launched to malign the judiciary, hence the alleged contemnor (Shamim) must bring the original copy of the affidavit. He submitted that the court should proceed collectively against Rana Shamim as well as the media which published his affidavit.

Justice Minallah observed that if Rana Shamim provides the court with another one, the onus will be on the newspaper that published the affidavit. “Your statement has complicated the matter for the newspaper,” Justice Minallah told Rana Shamim.

Meanwhile, Ansar Abbasi told the court that a NAB case was also fixed for December 7 in Lahore, therefore, Mir Shakil-ur-Rehman would not be able to appear before this court.

At this Justice Minallah told Ansar Abbasi that he may file an application for exemption in this regard and the court will look into it. The IHC chief justice observed that people respect the judiciary and restoring their confidence is paramount to this court. The court directed Rana Shamim to submit his written reply within five days along with the original document/affidavit which is stated to be sealed and kept in a locker in the United Kingdom. The court directed the attorney general to coordinate with Rana Shamim to facilitate him in the delivery of the affidavit from the United Kingdom. Similarly, the secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Pakistan High Commission in the United Kingdom are directed to assist the attorney general in this regard.

In case the original document/affidavit, on the basis of which the news report was published, is not produced before this court on the date fixed, it would raise a presumption of its non-existence, the court ruled in its order. The court also directed its office to relist the petition on 07.12.2021. The petition will be taken up at 11:00am on the date fixed. The court further directed its office to provide copies of replies submitted by the alleged contemnors to the amici curiae.