PM summoned again: Charged with contempt

Aitzaz Ahsan leaves the Supreme Court building after the case hearing in Islamabad. PHOTO: AFP

The Supreme Court concluded its preliminary hearings on Thursday and has decided it has sufficient cause to summon Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani once again and frame contempt of court charges against him.

And, once again, an undaunted prime minister has promised to appear in person.

‘After the preliminary hearing, we are satisfied that prima facie there is enough grounds for further proceedings,’ the court stated.

The seven-member bench set Gilani’s return for February 13 and this time the PM will be indicted for contempt, after preferring his subordinates’ advice over the court’s judgment in the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) case. Attorney General Maulvi Anwarul Haq confirmed that, as the principal officer of the court, he would frame charges against the prime minister.

Attention has already turned to Gilani’s position, with his counsel, Aitzaz Ahsan, firmly stating that the PM can hang on to his position even if contempt charges are brought against him. Other legal experts take the opposite view.

At the hearing, Aitzaz attempted to remind the bench of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry’s earlier position, which stated that the prime minister is obliged to take advice in all matters before taking any decision. Aitzaz stressed in the last hearing that the PM had been advised not to write the letter to Swiss authorities concerning the reopening of graft cases against President Asif Zardari.

He also referred back to decades-old procedures.

Justice Nasirul Mulk remarked that the premier gave full consideration to the views of his ministries, but seemed unaffected by the court’s orders. “The prime minister has the right to turn down the law ministry’s advice,” Justice Athar Saeed pointed out.

In reply to the question of writing the letter, Aitzaz told the court, “I seek discharge of notice on merit and I will not give a commitment on conditional discharge of the notice.”

To this, the bench said they would be willing to withdraw the contempt notice, “but what would happen next?” – in other words, would the lawyer ensure that his client followed their orders regarding the NRO case? Aitzaz, again, said he could not provide any assurances.

Meanwhile, in a surprising revelation, Aitzaz presented to the court a summary from September 23, 2010, which stated that there were no cases against the prime minister and the president in Switzerland.

The barrister told the court that the Swiss authorities wrote a letter to Pakistani authorities asking for evidence, in reply to which the government assured them that all the cases were closed in the country, owing to the NRO. Consequently, the Swiss authorities closed the cases on lack of evidence, Aitzaz said.

The court expressed surprise and asked why this was not presented in any of the previous hearings, adding that if the cases are closed, then why is the government afraid of writing the letter.

Ahsan also seemed to challenge the partiality of the court’s inquiries. He asked that, if the SC can send notices to civilian politicians, then why does it not take action against the generals who had been involved in arresting judges.

The premier, meanwhile, has said that he will honour the Supreme Court’s summons. Speaking on the floor of the National Assembly, he said, “When they called me earlier, I appeared … and I will again appear before the court.”

Regarding the formation of a parliamentary committee over the issue, Gilani said that the matter was sub-judice and that they should wait for the court’s decision before forming a committee. He said that they would respect the verdict of the courts.

(Read: Held in contempt)

Published in The Express Tribune, February 3^rd, 2012.