Despite availability, not informed on audio leaks commission setup: Chief Justice

SuchTV  |  Jun 06, 2023

Despite availability, not informed on audio leaks commission setup: Chief Justice
A 5-member larger bench headed by Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial comprising Justice Ejazul Hassan, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Shahid Waheed is hearing the case.

The Supreme Court has also issued a written order for the final hearing of the Audio Leaks Commission case.

In the decree issued by the Supreme Court, the Attorney General has said that the federal government has objected to the five-member larger bench, the federal government has also given a written request against the judges, the Registrar's Office should register the request of the federal government.

The Supreme Court order said that the parties can submit their reply to the response of the Audio Leaks Commission.

During the hearing of the petitions against the alleged Audioleaks Inquiry Commission, the Chief Justice remarked that the Chief Justice of Pakistan is a constitutional appointment, assuming that no one else can use the charge of the Chief Justice.

Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan raised objections from the bench on behalf of the government, Attorney General Mansoor Usman read out the objections from the bench, Chief Justice Umar Attabandial said that you are missing one thing, give arguments on these points.

Attorney General Mansoor Usman said that I will give arguments on the composition of the first bench, Chief Justice said that are you going to the point that 3 of us judges are controversial? Then you have to explain on what basis the assumption of 3 judges is controversial, the second and most important issue is the independence of the judiciary. I would like you to do other more important things.

The Attorney General read out the TORs of the AudioLeaks Commission, the Attorney General said that the leaked audios involved the mother-in-law of a Chief Justice. Justice Muneeb Akhtar said, "Is your case at this time that the audios are correct in hindsight?" The Attorney General said that the federal government has only formed a commission on this matter, it has formed a commission only to find out the facts.

Justice Muneeb Akhtar inquired whether the federal government does not know whether the audios are certified or not. The senior cabinet member also held a press conference on this, is it not true that the interior minister has held a press conference on these audios, some audios were also played in the press conference, is it correct that those who do not know the reality of the audios should raise objections on the bench, I will accept your request. 

Justice Muneeb Akhtar further said that why did the interior minister hold a press conference? Can such carelessness be tolerated? After such a statement, the minister would have been removed or he would have resigned.

The Attorney General told the court that can the statement of a minister be called the statement of the entire government? I don't know if anyone held a press conference. The court should see if the statement of the interior minister is before May 19 or after? Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that it is an important issue, the collective responsibility of the cabinet should have come forward on such an important issue.

The Chief Justice said, "Wow, what a beautiful method and what justice has been done to the judiciary?" First they ridiculed the judges, now they are investigating the authenticity of the videos.

Visit to news source webpage
More News
More News