Is the Pandora’s Box really closed?
The SC has dissolved the Suddle Commission. It says that as far as the apex court is concerned there is no need to proceed any further. The court has held that the case was an issue between two private individuals. This was the stand taken originally by Malik Riaz’s counsel also. If this was no more than that, what was the need to set up the Commission? Why did SC take a suo motu notice of the issue in the first place? It is maintained that the prestige of the court is no more at stake particularly after Malik Riaz’s admission that he did not accuse the CJ of allowing himself to be swayed in favour of the tycoon. But this is the position that the tycoon had taken even before. He had maintained that he was seeking justice against the son of a powerful man who had used his family position to blackmail him.
The case has been an above-the-fold issue in the media for nearly six months raising new questions and giving birth to suspicions. After taking suo motu notice of the allegations levelled by Malik Riaz, CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry initially declined to recuse himself from the bench. This was bound to lead to criticism. After his departure from the bench, the court handed over the investigation to the Attorney General who assigned it to NAB. On objections from Arsalan to the investigation team, the court reversed the decision and ordered the formation of a single member commission. This led former President SCBA Asma Jahangir to raise two objections. Why did the court appoint a new commission instead of changing the officers Arsalan had objected to? Was the probe going to be fair on account of Suddle’s close links with family of the CJ’s son? The objections were ignored.
The initial report holds the tycoon responsible for evading taxes to the tune of billions of rupees. It also makes observations that hurt Arsalan. According to the initial findings of the report, Arsalan admitted that he had availed two of the three foreign visits alleged by Riaz. Also that he had received ‘favours’ from Riaz, his friend and his son-in-law. The interim report also reveals that a company owned by Arsalan Iftikhar by the name of F&A did not submit its audit account for 2010 and 2011 while FBR has no record of tax returns of the other company owned by Arsalan. Arsalan is no ordinary person. He is the son of the CJ who had been living at latter’s residence till the initiation of the case. The question that would continue to tax people’s minds is how could the CJ, a person with impeccable honesty, let all this happen under his nose. Unless the two parties in the case decide to hush up things, as they are likely to hurt both, the Pandora’s Box will remain open.
if riaz malik has not paid taxes in trillion ND BILLION-WHY NOT TRY FBR AND ITS RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS.IT IS they are responsible
I object to the sentence "how could the CJ, a person with impeccable honesty, let all this happen under his nose". CJ has never been an honest person. He has done everything in the book to get favours for his son and his family. Getting his son in Medical school, transferring him to lucrative positions and foreign training, getting him promoted at super fast speed, upgrading his family to business class travel are just the tip of the iceberg. He is the most dishonest person and should have been kicked out of the office disgracefully had it been a developed country.
Iftakhar Choudhri is a morally corrupt person. We are nation off fools, who have made this opportunist a hero. He is a biased and dishonest person. What ever he did after his re installment can not wash away his misconduct till 2007. The true heros of judiciary are judges who refused to take oath in 1999.
Comments are closed.