Legal ambiguity blankets CJ's observations

ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court’s direction to the Punjab police chief to register an FIR of the gun attack on PTI chief Imran Khan within 24 hours has rather sowed confusion about its legal consequences for the matter while leaving many scratching their heads about its possible outcome.

Earlier on Monday, when the top court’s directions came, PTI was quick to extol it as the “first steps towards justice”. However, by evening, the party’s cheers turned into sighs as ambiguity continued to blanket the language of the verbal – and not written – order of the CJP Umar Ata Bandial.

On the other hand, the officials in the federal government tapped into the legal uncertainty and pointed out that the CJP has only asked the IG Punjab “to act in accordance with law”.

Both sides have interpreted the CJP's verbal observations differently.

The government officials said that the CJP did not bind the IG to register an FIR in view of Imran Khan’s statement, adding that the police can register the report on the complaint by any aggrieved person of this incident.

The matter was raised at the hearing of a contempt plea filed by the interior ministry against Imran for allegedly flouting a May 25 order of the apex court.

A five-member bench led by the CJP summoned provincial officers through a phone call to get an update about the non-registration of FIR on the Wazirabad incident.

Sources revealed to The Express Tribune that both officers were contacted half an hour before the hearing. Subsequently, they attended the proceeding from SC’s Lahore registry via video link.

Subsequently, the CJP issued guidelines to IG Punjab verbally. The gist of his oral observations was to provide full backing to the IG Punjab to act in the matter in accordance with the law and that the apex court would not allow any interference in the criminal justice system.

The CJP also warned of suo motu notice if the FIR of the attack on Imran was not registered in 24 hours.

However, at the end of the hearing, no written order was dictated regarding the IG Punjab’s appearance before the bench even as Punjab government authorities, including the police chief, kept waiting for the top court’s written order till evening for more clarity.

Legal experts are of the view that the matter is subject to legal nuts and bolts and is not as simple as interpreted.

The order has more particularly triggered a debate about whether the SC can call IG Punjab to the court through an administrative order and whether the police chief is bound to follow the oral observations/administrative order of the SC judges.

A lawyer cited the dictum often used by contract lawyers that a ‘verbal agreement was not worth the paper it is written on’. "I think the same applies to verbal orders too. An order is only binding if it is written and signed", he added.

He also stated that the concept of verbal order was known in the SC after the restoration of the judiciary in March 2009.

Another lawyer reckoned that his understanding was that no one had moved the court against the non-registration of an FIR, nor any suo motu notice has been taken. In the absence of the same, strictly speaking there can be no court order, he stressed.

Meanwhile, it was learnt that Imran Khan will approach the Supreme Court on Tuesday (today) and request it to start suo motu proceedings regarding the registration of FIR.

The PTI legal team is confident that the CJP will take suo motu notice in case IG does not register FIR in accordance with Imran Khan's statement.

Likewise, Senator Azam Swati is also moving an application today in the apex court for taking suo motu notice. Supreme Court Human Rights cell has already sought a report from FIA regarding Swati's allegations of custodial torture against him.

After going through all material, Supreme Court will decide whether suo motu proceedings should be initiated or not.

It is yet to be clear whether SC full court has determined the jurisdiction of the SC HR cell or not.