Memogate commission: Court admits review petition
Haqqani’s counsel had challenged the commission.
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court has decided to entertain former ambassador to the United States Hussain Haqqani’s review petition for hearing, Advocate-on-Record Chaudhry Akhter Ali told reporters on Wednesday.
The court has not formally announced a date for fixing the review petition before any bench though.
The petition was filed by Haqqani’s former counsel, Asma Jehangir, who sought a thorough review of the Supreme Court order handed down by a nine-judge bench on December 30.
The review petition challenged the court’s order on formation of a commission, and appointment of chief justices of three high courts to investigate the Memogate scandal.
The bench had also decided it has the jurisdiction to hear the case, despite the federation’s plea that a multi-party, bicameral parliamentary committee was the ‘appropriate’ forum to investigate the case.
Review arguments
In the review, Jehangir said the court did not have the authority to issue directions to judges of High Courts to constitute a commission.
She said that Article 2A of the Constitution, cited by the court while forming the commission, could not override the provisions of fundamental rights in the constitution.
“Only fundamental rights given in Chapter 1, Part II of the constitution, can be involved under Article 184(3),” she had argued.
She said her client had been deprived of his freedom of movement, despite the fact that he had not been formally charged yet.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 12th, 2012.
The Supreme Court has decided to entertain former ambassador to the United States Hussain Haqqani’s review petition for hearing, Advocate-on-Record Chaudhry Akhter Ali told reporters on Wednesday.
The court has not formally announced a date for fixing the review petition before any bench though.
The petition was filed by Haqqani’s former counsel, Asma Jehangir, who sought a thorough review of the Supreme Court order handed down by a nine-judge bench on December 30.
The review petition challenged the court’s order on formation of a commission, and appointment of chief justices of three high courts to investigate the Memogate scandal.
The bench had also decided it has the jurisdiction to hear the case, despite the federation’s plea that a multi-party, bicameral parliamentary committee was the ‘appropriate’ forum to investigate the case.
Review arguments
In the review, Jehangir said the court did not have the authority to issue directions to judges of High Courts to constitute a commission.
She said that Article 2A of the Constitution, cited by the court while forming the commission, could not override the provisions of fundamental rights in the constitution.
“Only fundamental rights given in Chapter 1, Part II of the constitution, can be involved under Article 184(3),” she had argued.
She said her client had been deprived of his freedom of movement, despite the fact that he had not been formally charged yet.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 12th, 2012.