ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court has given the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) one week to recover money from pilgrims who performed Hajj at the state’s expense in the last two years.
A six-member bench headed by the chief justice also directed the FIA to register criminal cases against officials of the ministries of interior and religious affairs involved in facilitating them.
FIA officials informed the court that Rs36.4 million has yet to be recovered from government-sponsored pilgrims. A real estate tycoon paid Rs2.5 million for air travel while another wealthy businessman provided funds for the pilgrimage. The chief justice ordered the FIA to proceed against the two sponsors and find out who authorised them to fund pilgrims on the government’s behalf. He reprimanded the FIA for its snail-paced investigation into the Hajj scam.
Justice Asif Saeed Khosa remarked that there would be serious repercussions if the state were to rely on individuals for sponsoring officially sanctioned expenses since the sponsors would want to obtain maximum benefit in return for the favour. He observed that the sponsors wanted to hide their crimes by funding the pilgrims which is a big crime.
Religious Affairs Secretary Shaukat Durrani informed the court that 448 pilgrims performed Hajj on government expense. Justice Sair Ali observed that there is no provision for free Hajj in Islam. He also observed that Hajj facilitators were not available in the camps of Pakistani pilgrims. Justice Javed Iqbal observed that 95 per cent of Hajj facilitators, recruited from the constituency of Hamid Saeed Kazmi, were performing Hajj instead of guiding pilgrims.
Two letters written to the religious ministry by the interior minister’s private secretary, Javed Iqbal, were produced before the bench. The first letter stated that the ministry will bear the expenses of government-sponsored pilgrims, whereas the second letter stated that the pilgrims would pay for the expenses. The court ordered the FIA to arrest Javed Iqbal and initiate proceedings against him.
Director Legal, FIA, Azam Khan contended that former secretary establishment Ismail Qureshi had appointed Rao Shakeel as former director general Hajj despite the fact that he was overage. The chief justice remarked that the working paper was not prepared by Qureshi.
The court directed the Director General FIA to investigate the matter himself. Ismail Qureshi is not to be arrested till further orders. The FIA informed the bench that the High Court had restrained the agency from arresting Zain Sukhera. The bench directed the high court to conduct an early hearing of FIA’s application and dispose it of.
The FIA informed the court that former state minister for religious affairs, Shagufta Jumani, was summoned for cross-examination after an individual by the name of Naseer accused her of receiving commission in the Hajj scam in a written application. The court directed Additional Director General FIA Javed Qureshi to look into the matter himself.
Contract officials
Secretary Establishment, Abdur Rauf Chaudhry submitted that the Prime Minister has accepted Waseem Ahmed’s resignation. The CJP remarked that it was his own initiative, the government had not acted on the Supreme Court’s directive. Counsel for federation, Abdul Hafeez Pirzada informed the court that removing 28 contract officials have been sent to the prime minister who will sign the summary on his return from a foreign tour.
The CJP observed that the Balochistan chief secretary had submitted a report claiming that no officer was appointed on contract in the province when in fact there are several. The Balochistan advocate general admitted that the chief secretary had made a mistake but he clarified that it was not intentional. The chief justice directed the AG to relieve police officers who were reappointed after retirement.
The court adjourned the case till April 22 with directions to the concerned parties to submit reports.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 9th, 2011.
COMMENTS (16)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ