Ex-CJP not entitled to bulletproof car's fuel and repair: AGP

Recommends recovery of ‘unauthorised’ expenditure

ISLAMABAD: The Auditor General of Pakistan (AGP) has declared that former chief justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is not entitled to a bulletproof car’s fuel and repair at the taxpayers’ expense, recommending that the authorities be asked to recover the amount.

Taking a notice of the “unauthorised expenditure” on fuel and repair of the vehicle of the retired chief justice of Pakistan, the AGP has not only recommended “that amount should be recovered or got regularised” but asked the law ministry to clarify its position.

AGP report: Irregularities to tune of Rs6.5b found at PPOD

In the audit report, the AGP said that the Principal Accounting Officer (PAO) was informed on January 1, 2017, but the Departmental Accounts Committee (DAC) was not convened till the finalisation of the report.

The auditors noted that the Islamabad High Court (IHC), while hearing a writ petition, decided on January 15, 2014 that the former CJP would be provided foolproof security along with provision of the bulletproof car for his use and that of his family without putting embargo of any time specification.

The order from IHC’s Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui had added that the maintenance and expenses of the bulletproof vehicle would be borne by the Ministry of Law and Justice.

‘Irregular appointment’: AGP office drops audit objection against Hijazi

In response to the decision, the report read, a bulletproof vehicle No. GD-0341 was provided by the Cabinet Division and the Ministry of Law and Justice which incurred the expenditure of Rs4,051,713 on its POL (petroleum, oil and lubricant) and repair since January 2014 till January 2016.

The audit also observed that the expenditure incurred by the ministry during the period was neither recovered nor regularised after the decision.

The AGP is of the view that the retired judges of the superior courts are paid POL charges from the budget of the relevant court as per privileges decided by the president. However, they are not entitled to any such facility from any other offices.

Audit report: PMDC allowed colleges to charge exorbitant fees

In the Intra-Court Appeal (ICA) No 65 of 2014, it said, a division bench of the IHC set aside the decision in its judgment dated May 11, 2016 noting that the single bench did not take several legal and factual aspects into account.

Among the reasons enlisted, the division bench comprising Justice (retd) Noorul Haq N Qureshi and Justice Aamer Farooq noted that the relief was granted against the appellants, who were neither parties cited in the array of respondents nor were later on asked to submit their comments.

While allowing the federal government’s ICA for reclaiming the car from the former CJP, the court sent the case back to Justice Siddiqui with directions to decide afresh “after considering the legal and factual aspects.”

Railways’ land: Encroachers occupy property worth Rs48.76b, says audit report

The division bench stated that neither notices were issued nor any order for issuance of the same to any of the parties cited in the titles of the list, question of locus standi was not examined and relief was granted without referring any provision of law.

In addition, it added, court merely endorsed the order passed by the prime minister and did not apply independent mind and the judgment lacked comments and legal and factual questions by the appellant or any other party necessary to the proceedings.

While observing all the legal and factual infirmities, the bench in its order stated that the questions necessary for deciding the “controversy” have not been properly addressed. Subsequently, the division bench had remanded back the case to Justice Siddiqui.

Whimsical promotions: SC broadens scope of 2013 judgment

On December 2, 2016, Justice Siddiqui had directed the authorities to produce the bulletproof car as case property by December 8. The order was challenged and another round of hearing started and till date the case has not been fully decided.

Though the former CJP himself has not yet asked for security, his newly established political party’s spokesperson Sheikh Ahsanuddin and another lawyer Taufiq Asif – in their personal capacity – remained engaged in the legal battle demanding a bulletproof car for him at the government expense.

Additional Attorney General (AAG) Afnan Karim Kundi had argued that there was no precedent for the provision of a bulletproof car to any former CJP, and if the practice was allowed, it would not only open the door for all retired judges of the superior judiciary to seek the same but would also be discriminatory under Article 25 of the Constitution.

Passport blacklisting: Former AGP goes to court

Kundi had argued that it should not appear as if judges were favoured simply for being judges. “And when the whole country was under threat, could everyone be granted the same security as Justice Chaudhry?”