The Supreme Court on Friday threw out a presidential reference filed against Justice Qazi Faez Isa in the Supreme Judicial Council and also withdrew a show-cause notice issued to the apex court judge.
“[The reference] is declared to be of no legal effect whatsoever and stands quashed,” read the majority (9-1) short verdict on a petition filed by Justice Isa and others seeking the reference’s dismissal. Justice Yahya Afridi, however, found the petition ‘non-maintainable’. The top court also ended any pending proceedings against the judge in the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC). “The Order of the Court is that Reference No 1 of 2019 is declared to be of no legal effect whatsoever and stands quashed, and in consequence thereof the proceedings pending in the Supreme Judicial Council against the petitioner (including the show-cause notice dated 17.07.2019 issued to him) stand abated,” the court order read.
Seven of the 10 judges on the bench ordered the Inland Revenue Department and the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to seek explanations from the judge’s wife and children on the nature and source of funding for three properties in their names in the United Kingdom and submit a report to the SC registrar in three months. “Within 7 days of this order, the concerned Commissioner of Inland Revenue shall himself issue appropriate notices under the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 to the spouse and children of the petitioner to offer an explanation regarding the nature and source of the funds (separately for each property) whereby the three properties in the United Kingdom (that are in the names of the spouse and the children were acquired,” the court order read. “Any notices issued or proceedings taken under the 2001 Ordinance in relation to any of the respondents in respect, or on account, of the properties aforesaid prior to the date of this order stand terminated forthwith,” it added.
“The respondents will furnish their replies to the notices along with material and record as is deemed appropriate. In case any of them is outside the country, it shall be the responsibility of such person to timely file a response, and the proceedings before the Commissioner shall not be adjourned or delayed for the reason of non-availability in Pakistan of such person,” the court order read. “Upon receipt of the replies, the commissioner shall give an opportunity of hearing to the respondents in person or through an authorized representative/counsel and shall thereupon make an order in accordance with the 2001 Ordinance,” it further said. “The proceedings shall be concluded before the Commissioner within 60 days of the date of receipt of the notices, and the order shall be issued by him within 75 days of the said date of receipt, and no adjournment or extension in time whatsoever shall be given as affects or extends the aforesaid periods,” it further said.
Subsequently, the FBR chairman shall submit a report duly signed by him to the SJC, ensuring that the entire record of the proceedings is appended. “The action/proceedings, if any, or orders or directions, if any, as may be taken, made or given by the Council shall be deemed, for purposes of Article 209 of the Constitution, to be in exercise of the suo moto jurisdiction as is conferred by that Article on the Council,” it added.
Other than the dissenting Justice Afridi, Justice Maqbool Baqar and Justice Mansoor Ali Shah opposed the majority decision of an FBR inquiry. The verdict was announced by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, who was heading the 10-judge bench hearing the case.
The case was wrapped up after Justice Isa’s spouse provided the money trail pertaining to her foreign properties and the Federal Board of Revenue provided its input on the matter.
Earlier, the petitioner’s lawyer, Munir A Malik, concluded his arguments in court by saying that the federation has ‘gotten on the wrong bus’ in the case. He urged the court to dismiss the reference against the judge. He said that a website had been used to search for properties in London. The lawyer told the court that if one wanted to search properties in London, he/she had to pay for the privilege. He said that the website sends a payment receipt to the person who uses it to search for properties, via email. He said that British-Pakistani lawyer Zia-ul-Mustafa, who had searched for Justice Isa’s alleged assets, had received three copies of the high commission’s verified properties. “Copies of politicians’ properties searched were attached as well [in documents submitted],” he said. “If the government provides receipts as well then it will be revealed who searched for the properties,” he added.
Malik said that if the search for the properties was conducted by the ARU, then it should provide receipts. He said that it seemed as if the ARU had only facilitated the search. “The government only wants to remove the author of the Faizabad dharna case,” noted Malik.
