Senate session: Opposition wants to quiz ex-CJ on retirement perks

Raises question over bulletproof car given to Iftikhar Chaudhry


Zahid Gishkori March 07, 2015
Raises question over bulletproof car given to Iftikhar Chaudhry. PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD: Opposition lawmakers insisted on Friday to summon former chief justice of the Supreme Court to explain his post-retirement perks and privileges which according to them were “unlawful and unconstitutional.”

Leader of Opposition in the Senate Aitzaz Ahsan said that the former chief justice was getting perks beyond limit. “Iftikhar Chaudhry should be summoned in the Senate law panel. Lawmakers want him to answer several questions—how he [Iftikhar] was using a bulletproof vehicle at the cost of taxpayers’ money beyond his entitlement,” Ahsan said.



Following his colleague’s harsh stance over ex-chief justice’s controversial perks, Senator Farahatullah Babar of PPP wanted to move a resolution in the house to take back the 6,000cc bulletproof vehicle from Iftikhar Chaudhry.

However, Senate Chairman Nayyer Hussain Bukhari said the motion should come through prescribed way under the rules.

“Why is this discrimination? It should end now,” Babar observed after Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Salman Aslam Butt informed the house that the government is bearing the cost and expenses of the bulletproof car on the directions of the Islamabad High Court.

AGP Butt, who was summoned over the perks controversy, said: “We just complied with the order of the court—yes we have also challenged this order too.” On this point, Bukhari asked: “Who was the petitioner? Was he an aggrieved person? This means that anybody can go to the court to get additional perks and privileges for other retired CJs. Is it not discrimination with other top judges [Chief Justices] of the apex court?”

Senators Saeed Ghani, Taj Haider of PPP, Rafique Rajwana of PML-N and Haji Muhammad Adeel of ANP also criticised additional perks being given to Justice Chaudhary.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 7th, 2015.

COMMENTS (3)

salim | 9 years ago | Reply Its called legalized corruption. A reference should be filed against the judge who passed this order.
Tamer | 9 years ago | Reply Perks for the elite! What's new?
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ