LHC refers Buzdar's matter to larger bench

Court is at a loss to understand why an arrest is necessary in every case, says Justice Tariq Saleem

LAHORE:

The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday turned down repeated requests from the law officer for withdrawing the court's earlier order of restraining concerned quarters from arresting former chief minister Usman Buzdar.

The court, presided by Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh, remarked that “this court is at a loss to understand why an arrest is necessary in every case”.

However, Justice Tariq Saleem referred the matter to the larger bench extending the stay over Buzdar’s arrest till May 8. The former chief minister had filed a plea seeking direction to the Anti-Corruption Establishment Punjab and Inspector General Police (IGP) Punjab for providing him with the case details if they were registered in the province.

As Justice Tariq Saleem was referring this matter to the larger bench, the law officer tendered repeated requests to the judge to withdraw his earlier order wherein he had restrained the concerned quarters from arresting Buzdar. In response to requests, the justice told the law officer that “eyes should not be kept closed after what occurred at former chief minister Chaudhry Pervez Elahi’s residence”.

“It makes no difference if Buzdar is not arrested till Monday,” Justice Tariq Saleem remarked and on a lighter note, observed that Buzdar's weekend will pass well. However, Justice Tariq Saleem referred the matter to a larger bench and also sought assistance from the advocate general Punjab.

During the proceedings today, petitioner Buzdar’s counsel Barrister Momin Malik, referring to different citations argued that the Supreme Court of Pakistan had explained the summoning power of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) in 2012.

He further informed the court that sub-section 4 of section 5 of Anti-Corruption Rules 2014 clearly refers to the provision of the complaint’s copy to the person who is summoned in that connection but no one is ready to implement it.

Barrister Momin Malik further implored the court that raids are being conducted, and the FIRs are being concealed and people could not even go to their homes.

Justice Tariq Saleem asked whether or not the petitioner joined the investigation, the law officer told the court that he had not yet joined the investigation. It irked Justice Tariq Saleem who made clear to the Buzdar, present in the courtroom, that he had to face the Constitution, even if he 'served as the chief minister'.

Buzdar replied that he was suffering from Covid-19 when he was summoned. But he was present in anti-corruption yesterday for three hours but was told that no case was registered against him.

Earlier proceedings

Barrister Momin Malik had earlier argued on the comparison between NAB’s recently amended Act and Anti-Corruption Laws. Shedding light, he contended to the court how an inquiry or the investigation has been regulated in the NAB laws and anti-corruption investigation rules are outdated and silent over the conversion of the inquiries into FIRs.

He further argued that the petitioner and others are summoned to face inquiries and are confronted with “ghost” FIRs and arrested without their being any opportunity to defend the allegations in the inquiries which is contrary to the Article 10-A of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 as introduced through the 18th amendment to the Constitution.

He submitted that respondents (Anti-Corruption Establishment Punjab and Inspector General Police (IGP) Punjab) initiated various frivolous and politically motivated inquiries, and investigations and converted them into “ghost FIRs” without bringing to his client’s notice merely to arrest him for violating the due process of law.

He requested the court to direct the Anti-Corruption DG Establishment to produce details of the FIRs registered against him in continuation of the inquiries already disclosed in para-wise comments in earlier petitions. He further requested the court that the Respondents be restrained from arresting the petitioner in the FIRs, if registered, and not disclosed till today.