Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on Wednesday constituted a seven-member larger bench headed by Justice Nasirul Mulk to hear on January 16 the case about the non-implementation of the court’s December 16, 2009 verdict against the National Reconciliation Ordinance.
The larger bench would consider six options pointed out by the five-member special bench on Tuesday that the court could take against the willful disobedience on part of the government in implementing some parts of the NRO verdict and consequent directions.
Earlier on Tuesday, a five-member special bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa had recommended the chief justice to constitute a larger bench to hear the case pertaining to the non-implementation on the NRO verdict, as the matter involved constitutional importance. The bench had also directed the attorney general, law secretary, NAB chairman and NAB prosecutor general to ensure their appearance in court in person on January 16. The court warned that it could disqualify both the president and the prime minister for disobeying its orders.
SC admits Haqqani’s review
petition against memo probe: The Supreme Court on Wednesday admitted for regular hearing a review petition filed by former ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani seeking review of the court’s December 30, 2011 short order.
The short order had declared the petitions for probe into the ‘memo’ controversy maintainable and constituted a three-member judicial commission headed by Balochistan High Court Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa to probe into the matter and submit its report within four weeks. It is expected that the nine-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry takes up the review petition next week. Haqqani had filed the review petition on January 9 through his counsel Asma Jahangir. He prayed the court to stay the proceedings before the judicial commission until the disposal of the review petition, as he would suffer irreparable harm if the commission reached a conclusion while his review petition remained pending with the court.
