Supreme Court to hear Imran’s plea against NAB law changes

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered fixing PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s petition against changes to the NAB law for hearing.

Justice Ijazul Ahsen heard the appeal in his chamber against the objections raised by the Registrar’s Office. After hearing arguments of Imran’s counsel Khwaja Haris, the court overruled the objections of the Registrar and directed the office to number the petition after fixing it in the open court for hearing.

Imran Khan had filed a chamber appeal in the Supreme Court against objections raised by the Registrar’s Office to his petition filed last month against amendments made to the NAB law. The Registrar’s Office, however, had returned the petition by raising objections, stating that the petitioner (Imran Khan) had not highlighted what matters of public importance were involved in the enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution so as to directly invoke the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 184(3).

Similarly, the Registrar had further stated that the ingredients for involving extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution had not been satisfied in the instant petition.

On Wednesday, Khwaja Haris, counsel for Imran Khan, appeared before the court and argued extensively on the objections raised by the Registrar’s Office. He submitted that some 14 law points were raised in the petition that directly related to public importance and enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

Similarly, he submitted that the apex court in its various judgments had invoked its original jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution when matters related to public importance and enforcement of fundamental rights were infringed upon.

He contended that sufficient grounds had been given in the petition with ingredients when issues relating of misappropriation of public funds as well as causing loss to the national exchequer were raised before the apex court. He said that the Registrar was not competent to determine the maintainability of an instant petition, challenging government amendments made to the NAB law.