Attorney mounts defence of changes in NAO

The Supreme Court on Tuesday inquired how a citizen could challenge a law passed by parliament in the apex court while hearing a case pertaining to amendments in the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO).

A three-member bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial took up the petition filed by PTI Chairman and former premier Imran Khan against the amendments introduced by the incumbent government.

Last year in July, the federal cabinet approved changes in the accountability laws, barring NAB from investigating corruption cases worth less than Rs500 million, defining the limit of a suspicious financial transaction while bounding the bureau to share the grounds of detention at the time of arrest, and empowering it to discharge or acquit accused at any stage.

On Tuesday, counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan, representing the federal government, said that the petitioner would have to explain that certain people were affected by the amendments.

He argued that the applicant would have to tell what flaws existed in the NAB amendments, adding that the “conduct” of the petitioner would also have to be seen.

He asked how Imran could call himself the representative of the people over violation of fundamental rights.

Justice Ijazul Ahsan remarked that the petitioner’s stance was that his party was the largest representative of the people in the country.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said the court was not informed how the basic rights of people were affected by the NAB amendments.

Counsel Makhdoom maintained that the NAO amendments discriminated against nobody.

Justice Mansoor asked how the amendments affected the basic rights of people if they brought a difference to the governance system.

He questioned how a citizen could challenge a law in the Supreme Court, which had been passed by parliament.

“If parliament abolishes death sentence, can the apex court restore it on the petition of the victims?” the judge questioned.

Makhdoom said that if petitions were brought before the court, defects would be observed in every law.

“If there is any flaw in the legislation, parliament can rectify it,” he said.
The counsel noted that 221 references were returned from 2019 till now because of the NAB amendments of which 29 pertained to the politicians.

He added that 41 people were acquitted since 2019, which included five politicians.

The lawyer noted that politicians were few among those who had benefitted or were acquitted because of amendments.

The CJP remarked that the politicians who had benefited from the NAB amendments were few but were “popular”.

Later, the hearing of the case was adjourned till Wednesday (today).