SC issues notice to Rehman Malik for non-implementation of court order

Court had ordered Malik to reimburse government


Hasnaat Mailk March 13, 2018
Rehman Malik. PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court issued on Tuesday a notice to Senator Rehman Malik regarding non-implementation of a top court's order.

A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Mian Saqib Nisar, resumed hearing in a contempt petition filed by habitual petitioner Mahmood Akhtar Naqvi.

Naqvi had prayed to the court that Malik had failed to compensate the government for the benefits utilised during his tenure as a senator despite the top court’s order in the dual nationality case.

Observing that the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leader had failed to follow the court's order, the bench served him a notice.

NAB-worthy: ‘Illegal’ hiring may land Rehman Malik in trouble


In December 2017, the former interior minister came into the limelight after a written response was submitted by the Ministry of Interior to a question by Iqbal Muhammad Ali Khan of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) in the National Assembly, revealed that Malik and top bureaucrats in interior ministry may have violated laws by hiring 147 persons in the Passport Office.

Malik, who served as interior minister from 2008-2013, recommended the hiring of 64 of these persons.

Khawaja Siddique Akbar, the then secretary interior, awarded jobs to 20 persons while being the ‘recommending authority’. Similarly, Syed Wajid Ali Shah, who was the DG at the Directorate General of Immigration & Passport, was the ‘recommending authority’ in 63 cases.

The documents suggest a nexus of the three individuals – Malik, Akbar and Shah – in making illegal appointments. In many cases, Malik was the ‘recommending authority’ while Shah acted as ‘approving authority’. Shah also acted both as ‘recommending authority’ and ‘approving authority’ in numerous cases while awarding the jobs.

 

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