SAPM petition again referred to IHC’s earlier bench
New bench members recuse themselves from hearing plea against appointment of PM’s unelected aides
New bench members recuse themselves from hearing plea against appointment of PM’s unelected aides. PHOTO: FILE
ISLAMABAD:
An Islamabad High Court (IHC) bench that was reconstituted on Saturday to hear a petition against appointment of unelected advisers and special assistants to the prime minister dissolved on Tuesday as the bench members recused themselves from hearing the case.
The petition was earlier heard by a division bench comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Ghulam Azam Qambrani. However, according to a cause list issued on May 30 by the IHC registrar office, Justice Farooq was replaced by Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb.
When the new bench took up the petition on Tuesday, Justice Miangul observed that another bench was hearing the petition earlier. The judge noted that he could not hear the petition and that he was referring it once again to the IHC office to be sent to the previous bench.
The writ petition filed by GM Chaudhry advocate on behalf of a citizen on January 2 challenged appointments of 5 advisers and 15 special assistants to Prime Minister Imran Khan.
When he came to power in August 2018, Prime Minister Imran Khan had expressed his resolve to run the affair of his government through a small cabinet, the petition said.
However, following the tradition of the previous governments he continued to increase the size of his cabinet in the coming months. Right now the federal cabinet comprises 50 members, including five unelected advisers and fifteen unelected special assistants.
The petitioner asked the court to declare sub-rule (6) of Rule 4 of the Rules of Business, 1973, as ultra vires to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, illegal and the appointments of the special assistants to the PM as a burden on the national economy.
“All such appointments are liable to be set aside ab initio from their dates of appointment with a further direction to declare the actions, decisions or exercise of any power under any law as well as receipt of any financial benefit,” said the petition.
It also questioned competence and expertise of the SAPMs and advisers in the areas allocated to them and claimed that there is not any noteworthy and substantial contribution of them towards Pakistan and its governance system.
“[They have not made any substantial contributions] except that they had enjoyed friendly relations [with the PM] or managed their appointments by using undue influence and receiving hefty salaries, allowances, perks and privileges,” it added.
The petition also said that SAPM on National Security Division Moeed Yousuf had worked with various US think tanks and that his appointment could be against the country's interests.
At an earlier hearing of the case, the federal government had submitted its reply. The deputy attorney general had also sought time for the SAPMs to file a reply.
The court was told that Yousuf Baig Mirza, Shamshad Akhtar and Iftikhar Durrani had resigned from the positions of the SAPMs while Naeem-ul-Haq had passed away and Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan had been removed from the office.
The petitioner's counsel had told the court the resignation of the special assistants was not enough and their privileges should be withdrawn. Justice Aamer Farooq had remarked that first the court will want to see responses of all the special assistants.
Petitioner's counsel had raised an objection to the federation pursuing the cases of the special assistants and demanded that the SAPMs should defend their cases individually.
An Islamabad High Court (IHC) bench that was reconstituted on Saturday to hear a petition against appointment of unelected advisers and special assistants to the prime minister dissolved on Tuesday as the bench members recused themselves from hearing the case.
The petition was earlier heard by a division bench comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Ghulam Azam Qambrani. However, according to a cause list issued on May 30 by the IHC registrar office, Justice Farooq was replaced by Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb.
When the new bench took up the petition on Tuesday, Justice Miangul observed that another bench was hearing the petition earlier. The judge noted that he could not hear the petition and that he was referring it once again to the IHC office to be sent to the previous bench.
The writ petition filed by GM Chaudhry advocate on behalf of a citizen on January 2 challenged appointments of 5 advisers and 15 special assistants to Prime Minister Imran Khan.
When he came to power in August 2018, Prime Minister Imran Khan had expressed his resolve to run the affair of his government through a small cabinet, the petition said.
However, following the tradition of the previous governments he continued to increase the size of his cabinet in the coming months. Right now the federal cabinet comprises 50 members, including five unelected advisers and fifteen unelected special assistants.
The petitioner asked the court to declare sub-rule (6) of Rule 4 of the Rules of Business, 1973, as ultra vires to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, illegal and the appointments of the special assistants to the PM as a burden on the national economy.
“All such appointments are liable to be set aside ab initio from their dates of appointment with a further direction to declare the actions, decisions or exercise of any power under any law as well as receipt of any financial benefit,” said the petition.
It also questioned competence and expertise of the SAPMs and advisers in the areas allocated to them and claimed that there is not any noteworthy and substantial contribution of them towards Pakistan and its governance system.
“[They have not made any substantial contributions] except that they had enjoyed friendly relations [with the PM] or managed their appointments by using undue influence and receiving hefty salaries, allowances, perks and privileges,” it added.
The petition also said that SAPM on National Security Division Moeed Yousuf had worked with various US think tanks and that his appointment could be against the country's interests.
At an earlier hearing of the case, the federal government had submitted its reply. The deputy attorney general had also sought time for the SAPMs to file a reply.
The court was told that Yousuf Baig Mirza, Shamshad Akhtar and Iftikhar Durrani had resigned from the positions of the SAPMs while Naeem-ul-Haq had passed away and Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan had been removed from the office.
The petitioner's counsel had told the court the resignation of the special assistants was not enough and their privileges should be withdrawn. Justice Aamer Farooq had remarked that first the court will want to see responses of all the special assistants.
Petitioner's counsel had raised an objection to the federation pursuing the cases of the special assistants and demanded that the SAPMs should defend their cases individually.