SC questions government’s protection of NRO

Questioning the protection of the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), a law enacted by a dictator, by a democratic government, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry observed on Monday that the federation had never accepted this “black law” and parliament had not ratified it.
The chief justice was heading a 17-member larger bench of the Supreme Court hearing the government’s review petition against the court’s December 16, 2009 verdict declaring the NRO, promulgated by former president Pervez Musharraf, unconstitutional. The court directed the government to file its written reply by Tuesday (today) over the threats received by the federation’s former counsel Kamal Azfar after he was separated from the NRO case. The court also directed Azfar to appear before it on Tuesday. The government submitted an application to engage Dr Babar Awan as its counsel in the review plea against the NRO verdict. The court directed Awan to argue before the court today on the maintainability of the review petition and held that it would decide later on whether he could argue the case as the federation’s counsel. Awan told the court that various developments had taken place during the time the review plea was pending. He said Latif Khosa, who was engaged as the counsel after Azfar, had since become the governor of Punjab. The court asked Awan about the reasons behind the separation of Azfar from the case. The court also provided him a letter from Azfar about the threats he had received, and asked him to read it. To a court query, Awan stated that when the review petition was filed in the apex court, Masood Chishti was not a law minister, instead he was a lawyer of the Supreme Court. Justice Mian Saqib Nisar said that meant that Chishti was not competent to file the review petition in the apex court. Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa enquired why the attorney general, being a principal law officer, was not appearing in court to represent the federation and told Awan to explain the reasons by Tuesday. Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali questioned whether a drama was staged by sidelining Azfar from the NRO case just to delay its hearing. The chief justice remarked that Azfar was a senior lawyer of the apex court who was threatened and later sidelined from the NRO case.
“Why did the government fail to protect its lawyer?” the chief justice asked, and told Awan to submit the government’s written reply over the separation of Azfar from the NRO case. Awan said he had met Azfar but he did not talk about any threats. “That means Kamal Azfar has no fear of any threats and can argue [the case] before the court,” Justice Nasirul Mulk said. Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany noted that under the Supreme Court Rules, there was no provision for change of lawyer in the review plea stage. Awan, however, contended that the Supreme Court Rules had no dominance over the constitution, which permitted the government to hire its counsel of choice. “Supreme Court Rules were framed according to the constitution,” Justice Osmany replied.
The chief justice said even parliament had not ratified the NRO, and not a single beneficiary of the ordinance had come to the Supreme Court against its judgement. “We don’t know why the democratic government is supporting the law enacted by a dictator,” the chief justice noted, adding that even former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, in her book, was critical of the law. The court later adjourned further hearing until Tuesday (today).