Expressing a lack of confidence in the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), the Supreme Court on Thursday transferred the Dr Arsalan Iftikhar case to Federal Tax Ombudsman Dr Shoaib Suddle – an officer believed close to President Asif Ali Zardari.
Per the verdict that had been reserved by the two-member bench the other day, Dr Suddle would act as a one-man commission to investigate the Dr Arsalan-Riaz case within a month. Suddle is a former senior policeman and has expertise in probing into financial matters as well.
The reserved verdict was announced by Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, who headed the bench that heard the case. “We are of the opinion that in order to keep matters clear of any subjective perceptions, it would be appropriate if the inquiry is entrusted to someone with relevant seniority, experience and standing,” the court noted. Citing reason for handing over investigation to Dr Shoaib Suddle, Justice Khawaja said the professionalism and thoroughness of the inquiry undertaken by him in the suo motu case regarding ISAF containers scam convinced them to refer this inquiry to him.
He was also authorized to probe into the accusations of Malik Riaz Hussain, Dr Arsalan Iftikhar, Salman Ali Khan and all those others “who may be found involved in criminal activities in the light of our earlier order of the court dated 14.6.2012 and the observations made in Thursday’s order”. He would specify the legal provisions and offenses, if any, which might be attracted in the case based on the fact finding undertaken by the commission, the order said.
Suddle would also inquire into and ascertain such facts as might be relevant, connected with or ancillary to the determination of the foregoing matters and to set the machinery of the state in motion so that all those who might have committed illegal acts were pursued and brought to book with the full force and rigor of the law. The bench also ordered that the entire record available with NAB that related to the matter would be handed over to the commission, whereas the registrar’s office would also provide copies of the record of this petition. The one-man commission is also given the following powers and he may seek such further orders as may be considered necessary:-
“(i) he shall exercise all the powers envisioned in the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 and the powers of Judicial Officers for the purpose of carrying out the objects mentioned hereinabove;
(ii) he shall be free to avail the services of advocates, experts of forensic science, persons with relevant experience, including fiscal laws etc. State functionaries when called upon to do so shall provide necessary assistance to the commission; iii) the commission shall be authorized to collect evidence within and outside Pakistan according to prevailing laws on the subject; iv) the commission is required to complete this task within a period of thirty days after receipt of the copy of this order. The bench also tasked the commission with inquiring into conduct of SP Faisal Bashir Memon and DSP Tahir Malik, who might have submitted “false, dishonest or deliberately misleading statements” in the court during these proceedings or during inquiries ordered by the court. The proceedings in the inquiry shall not preclude the departmental authorities from taking disciplinary proceedings against these two officers in accordance with law as has also been recommended by the Interior Ministry, the order said. Accepting objections of Dr Arsalan’s counsel regarding NAB’s investigation into the issue, the bench noted that they had concluded that any inquiry by NAB in the matter would not be free from perception of partiality or bias or lack of competence. “To meet the ends of justice and to ensure a fair, impartial, honest and competent inquiry, the same should be transferred to some other person or agency to act independently, fairly and justly,” the bench noted the reason for transferring of the investigation process.
supreme court,s bias has been exposed badly.they are fully helping the accused,and the victom malik riaz has been charged with contempt.well done chief justice.
chief justice must resign now. when his own son,s case came in the court ,he failed to do justice.
Shhhhh khabardar CJ Sb kay bary may kuch kha
why did the the supreme court not order to lock arslan up,why is he walking free,and why is cj not resigning.
This CJ 's position is no more tenable, he must resign & go home
dear angry men! Just hold your beats, think, cj isolated himself from this case, why?, only for this that people like you will say its bais. He himself take suo moto against his son, who do like this, have you a single example from whole the world……….???
He didn't sideline himself right away. On the first hearing, when the lawyer objected to this point CJ hearing his own osn's case, CJ reminded the lawyer not to preach him. Thief Justice has to quit now.
Thief Justice?
PUPOO YARR TANG NA KARR
now the alegations on NAB from arslan has been removed and he should cooperate with new investigation team to finish this matter in a good way, the guilty must be punished and non guilty must be compensated for this whole suffering, and it is clear that one who is guilty is continiously raising issues in one or another way
Is this Mr. Suddle the same person whose name figured prominantly in Murtaza Bhutto murder case?
cheap justice
Well now Arslan is on way to cooperating with NAB now its NAB duty they should wind up this case asap and the guilty should be punish……
In Arslan Iftikhar case Chief Justice is trying his best to save the skin of his beloved son. He showed mistrust on JIT , NAB and AG which is tantamount to humiliate state institutions. Now issue can be taken with this judgement at a number of levels and on a number of contentious decisions contained therein. First and foremost, the SC seems to have taken recourse to speculative opinion about NAB’s bias or competence before the fact has been established in any reasonable manner. The AG’s representing one party professionally is hardly conclusive proof of bias. The judgement’s castigation of the police officers in question seems to be based purely on behaviour or ‘body language’ evident in video evidence placed before the court by Arsalan’s lawyers taken from the SC’s CCTV cameras. The placing of this video evidence by a party to the case aroused a great deal of concern even then as to how one party could get hold of internal SC footage not normally available to any member of the public. Second, did the footage establish beyond reasonable doubt or at least contention that the police officers betrayed bias or sympathy towards the other party, Malik Riaz Hussain? Could it not be argued, for example, that they were simply showing courtesy to one of the litigants or even ensuring their safety?
3single (dot) com is a great site. It also has live chat so you can chat to other people online. Good luck.
Comments are closed.