Tag: Justice Minallah

  • Justice Minallah says live streaming of Khan’s appearance in court not against law

    Justice Minallah says live streaming of Khan’s appearance in court not against law

    Supreme Court Justice Athar Minallah on June 5 issued a dissenting note on the majority verdict against the petition seeking live streaming of the hearing of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) amendment case, stating that there was “no substantive reason” to deny the public the right to have access to court proceedings.

    In a 13-page long document, the judge asserted that “Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi is the founder and undisputed leader of a major political party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI).” Therefore live streaming his court appearances wasn’t against the law.

    The development came after the Supreme Court released a detailed verdict on the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government’s petition last week, stating that broadcasting the court proceedings of cases involving politicians can be used for political “point-scoring”.

  • ‘Use of blasphemy laws for political purposes is also blasphemy’: Justice Minallah

    The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has prohibited the police from filing blasphemy cases.

    The order was issued by IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah on Wednesday while hearing a petition filed by former federal information minister Fawad Chaudhry to prevent the police from arresting Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) members who were charged with blasphemy after a hooliganism incident in Masjid-e-Nabawi.

    Justice Minallah said the use of blasphemy laws for political purposes is also blasphemy.

    Before detaining somebody under the blasphemy laws, he noted, the police must satisfy the court of reasonable justification.

    The FIRs were filed by citizens, according to the deputy attorney general. CJ Minallah, on the other hand, interposed, claiming that the FIRs were filed with malicious intent.

    During the hearing on May 2, the court ordered the police not to arrest the PTI leaders, stating that they are still members of the National Assembly and cannot be detained without the Speaker’s approval.

    Cases were registered against various PTI members including Chairman Imran Khan, Fawad Chaudhry, Shahbaz Gill, Sheikh Rashid, and his nephew Rashid Shafique, who have been charged for violating Pakistan Penal Code sections 295 (defiling a place of worship) and 296 (disturbing a religious assembly).

  • ‘Seems like PM Khan was not assisted correctly over PECA Ordinance’: Justice Minallah

    During the hearing of a plea challenging the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) PECA Ordinance, 2022, Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice Athar Minallah reportedly issued a notice to the attorney-general of Pakistan and directed him to combine this petition with other petitions that are against PECA.

    Justice Minallah said that it seems like no one told the premier that there are laws for contempt other than PECA. He was referring to Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan’s address yesterday. “It seems like PM Khan was not assisted correctly over PECA Ordinance,” said Justice Minallah, adding that the law is used against critics here.

    The plea was filed by former president of Lahore High Court (LHC) Bar Maqsood Buttar. In the petition, it was argued that the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) doesn’t have the authority to deal with a matter between two private parties.

    Previously, the IHC chief called the amendment “draconian in nature”. He said it is even worse than the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) law.

    Last month, President Arif Alvi passed an Ordinance amending PECA 2016, an attempt to make online “defamation” of authorities, including the military and judiciary, a criminal offence with harsh penalties.

    The high court adjourned the hearing till March 10.

  • Mohsin Baig case: Court says FIA misused its power, issues show-cause notice

    Mohsin Baig case: Court says FIA misused its power, issues show-cause notice

    Islamabad High Court (IHC) issued show-cause notice to the Director of Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) cybercrime wing, Babar Bakht Qureshi, on Monday for misusing FIA’s powers in the arrest case of journalist Mohsin Jamil Baig.

    The FIA cybercrime wing and the police arrested and raided Daily Jinnah and Online news agency Editor Mohsin Baig’s house. He was accused of initiating a debate on News One’s programme ‘G for Gharidah’. He made some controversial references towards Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan and Minister for Communication Murad Saeed.

    IHC Chief Justice (CJ) Athar Minallah asked, “Why should we not register contempt of court case against the FIA? Do they think they are above the law?”

    During the hearing, Justice Minallah grilled the FIA director, reminding him that the court had told the agency to not make arrests. “This court will take action against you. Your job is to protect people and not to restore the reputation of an elite person.”

    Justice Minallah also posed some questions related to the arrest. He asked Qureshi that when there were four people in the programme, why only Baig was arrested.

    Justice Minallah further said that the agency has always abused its authority, adding that the court will not allow the FIA to infringe on anyone’s fundamental rights.

    When asked about PM Khan’s ex-wife Reham Khan’s book and which reference was given by Baig in the show. Additional Attorney General Qasim Wadood, who was present before the court, replied that he had not read the book.

    “Does everyone know what is written in the book?”, CJ asked.

    Justice Minallah said that this court has repeatedly said that you should be careful but the message being given is that there is no freedom of expression.

    However, the Director of FIA continued his argument that the reference to the book is defamatory and added, “We must discourage obscenity.”

    CJ Minallah stated that the biggest obscenity is not respecting the constitution, adding that prohibition is an abuse of power.

    Responding to contempt of court notice, Quershi pleaded to the CJ, saying we are like your children, have mercy. To which the CJ responded, “You are not my child and I am not your father.”

    Subsequently, the hearing was adjourned and Justice Minallah asked Qureshi to submit his response. The court also summoned Attorney General Khalid Javed Khan in the next hearing on February 24. Previously, an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) approved the three-day remand of journalist Mohsin Baig.

  • ‘Used’:Rana Shamim in trouble as court frame charges against ex-judge

    ‘Used’:Rana Shamim in trouble as court frame charges against ex-judge

    The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday set January 7, 2022, as the date for framing charges against former Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Judge Rana Shamim and others in a case related to an affidavit that accuses former Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar of colluding to deny bails to Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leadership prior to the 2018 elections.

    During the hearing today, CJ IHC Athar Minallah observed that Shamim’s written response submitted to the court had “laid the entire blame” on journalist Ansar Abbasi [the journalist who published the story accusing CJP Nisar], recalling that the former jurist had also maintained that he had not shared the affidavit with anyone.

    He added that in similar circumstances, courts in the United Kingdom asked journalists to disclose their sources but the IHC would not do so.

    “The judge [mentioned in] the affidavit was on leave at the time. Attempts were also made to cast doubt on the two judges on the bench,” Justice Minallah said.

    Justice Minallah said the matter had “nothing to do” with the former CJP. “Go and do what you want to do with Mian Saqib Nisar,” he remarked.

    He recalled that proceedings had started because of an attempt to cast suspicion on judges of the high court. “[This] perception is being created which everyone has started believing as true,” Justice Minallah said.

    “Where was that perception when bail was granted two weeks later by this same court?” he questioned.

    Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed Khan said that the concerned document was very important in contempt of court case. Shamim’s counsel, Lateef Afridi, responded that Shamim had said the affidavit was a “private document” and was written at his wife’s request.

    “By now, even Rana Shamim must have come to know how sensitive this issue is,” Justice Minallah remarked.

    “Contempt of court cases were initiated against Firdous Ashiq Awan in [the IHC] and Imran Khan in the Supreme Court. What happened in those cases? Such cases are initiated and the court has to show mercy,” Afridi responded.

    Afridi said Shamim “did not know about the affidavit’s consequences when he wrote it”. The judge reiterated his question about who the beneficiaries were to which Afridi again responded that he did know and requested the court to not waste time on the issue since there were other cases pending.

    The chief justice remarked, “What if Kulbhushan Jadhav (Indian spy) submitted an affidavit saying his case should not be heard by this court since it is compromised? This is a serious matter. Understand the consequences of this affidavit.”

    Meanwhile, journalist Ansar Abbasi said that he had talked to Shamim a day before the report was published. “Rana Shamim also [messaged] me that what I read out was correct,” the journalist said.

    Subsequently, the attorney general requested the court to indict Shamim and others. Terming Shamim responsible since he was the one who wrote the affidavit, the AG said the ex-judge had committed contempt of court.

    “Since the past three days, there are [reports] that the affidavit was written in someone’s office. It is surprising that no denial has come forth,” the AG said.

    Shamim’s counsel responded that the matter had been denied in a TV interview. However, the AGP argued that no denials were made by those related to the matter.

    “Rana Shamim should accept that he was used and apologise. If he does, then I too will [ask the court] to not take action. If he doesn’t apologise, then set a date quickly for indictment,” the AG requested the court.

    Subsequently, the court set January 7, 2022, as the date for framing charges.

  • ‘Who has the capability to record the chief justice of Pakistan?’ Asks Justice Athar Minallah

    ‘Who has the capability to record the chief justice of Pakistan?’ Asks Justice Athar Minallah

    Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice Athar Minallah said that the courts cannot risk “opening up of the floodgates” by ordering inquiries into “anything that goes viral on social media”, remarking that vigorous judicial activism had caused a lot of damage to the judiciary, reports Dawn.

    “Anything goes viral on social media. How many can the court order inquiries into?” the high court chief justice questioned during a hearing on Monday.

    Justice Minallah’s remarks come during a hearing of a petition asking for a Commission of Inquiry to investigate an alleged audio clip of former Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Saqib Nisar.

    The judge wondered who was behind the audio leak. “Who has the capability to record the chief justice of Pakistan? Did that person release it or someone sitting in America?”

    Questioning the petitioner,  Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA) President Salahuddin Ahmed, Justice Minallah asked, “Tell [the court] how this petition is maintainable. What writ should we issue?”

    To the question asked on the writ of the state, Ahmed responded that the court’s power regarding the enforcement of fundamental rights was very extensive and it could exercise this right under Article 199-C of the Constitution.

    “The court cannot play into the hands of political entities trying to build narratives rather than approach the court themselves,” responded Justice Minallah.

    “When they do not approach the court, the court also has to see what their intentions are,” he added. “Who released the audiotape and to whom?”

    Questioning the authenticity of the audio clip, Justice Minallah remarked: “Suppose this audio is legitimate, where is the real clip? Tomorrow, anybody will bring a clip and ask for an inquiry.”

    The court subsequently issued a notice to Attorney General Khalid Jawed Khan to argue on the maintainability of the petition and adjourned the hearing till December 8.

  • Islamabad Court Chief Justice says remarks about retired judges, ex-CJP not contempt of court

    Islamabad Court Chief Justice says remarks about retired judges, ex-CJP not contempt of court

    Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice Athar Minallah observed on Friday, that remarks about retired officials did not warrant contempt of court charges, even if they were made against a former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP).

    Justice Minallah made the observation during a hearing to decide the maintainability of a petition, filed by Advocate Kulsoom Khaliq, seeking contempt proceedings against Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leaders Maryam Nawaz and Shahid Khaqan Abbasi for trying to scandalise the judiciary through their statements against the former CJP Saqib Nisar.

    On November 15, Abbasi demanded that a suo motu notice be taken against Nisar after the former chief judge of Gilgit-Baltistan Rana Shamim accused Nisar of being involved in denying bail to PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif and Maryam ahead of the 2018 general elections.

    Abbasi, questioning the lawmakers, said, “If Mian Nawaz Sharif can go to jail, why can’t Mian Saqib Nisar?”

    IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah said in his written order that a judge who ceases to hold a judicial office “attains the status of a private citizen”.

    “Such a person is no more a member of the ‘Court’ in the context of Article 204 of the Constitution nor under the Ordinance of 2003,” Justice Minallah wrote.

    “It remains open to a retired judicial officer to seek remedies available in a court of law. However, the offence of contempt is not attracted in the case of a retired judge because after retirement the latter attains the status of a private citizen,” wrote Justice Minallah.

    He insisted that judges were open-minded about criticism, saying, “Judges hold a very high position and they should welcome criticism.”