I have been watching the contempt proceedings against the Prime Minister and your able conduct of the case.
I have some points, which may be of some assistance to you.
1. The judges in the bench, who were re-appointed through an executive order, their appointment can be challenged being against the Constitution of Pakistan. When this objection is raised those judges should immediately leave the bench as they cannot decide this issue because they cannot be the judge of their own cause.
2. The decision on NRO is per-incurrium and therefore is not binding. The decision is per-incurrium because it was given in ignorance of Article (8) of the Constitution and Section (6)A of the General Clauses Act. It also failed to take notice of the fact that NRO was not an original law but an amended law. Different consequences flow if this distinction is kept in view in regard to a particular ordinance.
3. There is no contempt law in the field. The Contempt of Court Act of 1976 was repealed by the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 1998. It was again repealed by the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003. This later Ordinance stands repealed because it was never placed before the Parliament. Then another ordinance called Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2004 was promulgated, under which, for the third time The Contempt of Court Act, 1976 was repealed. This later Ordinance also expired as it was not placed before the Parliament.
The 18th Amendment under which certain laws were validated has no application on Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 and 2004.
I can also draft a Letter for the Swiss Bank in compliance with the Supreme Court Order, but without causing any harm to anybody.
SYED ABRAR HUSSAIN NAQVI
Lahore
