Continued from page 32 – The leader of the opposition has the highest respect and regard for the august court and is of the view that its order should have been accepted without demur and another suitable person appointed after meaningful and consensus-oriented consultation in accordance with paragraph above.”
“The leader of the opposition considers it’s strange that without waiting for the detailed order of the court, the president has again proposed the appointment of Justice (r) Shah as chairman NAB. On the same day, the Sindh branch of the Pakistan People’s Party, of which party the president is the co-chairperson, organised a province-wide protest against the order of the apex court, bringing it into hatred, ridicule and contempt and provoking a confrontation on a non-issue, viz that Justice (r) Shah belongs to Sindh.
The tragic aspect of this unlawful protest, which has made Justice (r) Shah even more controversial, is that it resulted in the death of a number of innocent citizens in Karachi,” it adds. The letter says that the leader of the opposition is firmly of the view that the consultative process can be initiated only after issue of the detailed order of the august court. “His opinion on the president’s proposal will therefore be conveyed after he has had an opportunity to read the reasons forming the basis for the court’s declaration that Justice (r) Shah’s original appointment was illegal and ultra-vires.
However, he has directed me to point out with reference to the contentions in the president’s letter that: a) The decision of the supreme court of Pakistan in the Al-Jehad case relates to appointment of judges of the superior courts who are recommended by the chief justice of the high court concerned and the chief justice of Pakistan. In the case of chairman NAB, the amendments proposed by the PML-N in the new accountability bill if accepted by the government, would have ensured that the appointment procedure is in line with the relevant provisions of the Charter of Democracy (Ann. C) but even under the existing section 6 (b)(i) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, the intention is clearly that consultation by the president with the prime minister and leader of the opposition should be meaningful and consensus oriented, resulting in the appointment of a chairman of unimpeachable integrity and unquestionable impartiality.
Consultation is no way means merely informing the leader of the opposition as the president has implied in this entire process. b) Reliance on Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif’s application in the Supreme Court in the criminal appeal against an order of the high court of Sindh is entirely misplaced. In the said application his lawyers had complained about certain difficulties faced by them during hearings of the case in the high court and had pointed out that such difficulties had not arisen earlier when Justice (r) Shah was the chief justice, because he had cautioned both advocates and the public to maintain discipline and decorum.”
“How this particular comment has been translated into Mian Nawaz Sharif’s expression of confidence in Justice (r) Shah and used and misused publicly by the government is indeed a sad reflection on how government interprets words and incidents to suit its own perspective and interests,” the letter adds. “To conclude, it is reiterated that opinion of the leader of the opposition regarding the proposed appointment of Justice (r) Shah in terms of section 6 (b)(i) ibid will be conveyed after receipt of the detailed order of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan,” the letter concludes.
