Riaz files petition against 'unlawful' Suddle commission
12 September, 2012
ISLAMABAD: Challenging the Supreme Court's August 30 judgement about investigation of the Arsalan Iftikhar case, real estate tycoon Malik Riaz's counsel, Zahid Bukhari, on Tuesday moved a review petition stating that the judgement had been passed without lawful authority and jurisdiction as the order did not describe under what law the one-man commission of Dr Shoaib Suddle was constituted to carry out the probe.
The petition argued that the judgement amounted to giving preferential treatment to a specific party.
Bukhari argued that there were serious apprehensions and doubts about the independence of Suddle as he actively participated in the wedding of Arsalan Iftikhar and Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and his family attended the marriage ceremony of Suddle's son in December 2011. He said Suddle's relations with Arsalan Iftikhar and his family would be a hurdle in conducting a fair inquiry.
The counsel said the petitioners were not consulted before appointing Suddle's one-man commission. Judicial powers for probe could not be awarded to a member of executive, who was not a judicial officer, he said, adding that the court could not pass an order of entirely different nature without annulling its June 14, 2012 order.
He said the judgement amounted to preferential treatment for one of the parties concerned and violation of fundamental rights of the petitioner as guaranteed under the articles 4 and 25 of the constitution, which provide that every citizen has right to be treated strictly in accordance with the law without any discrimination.
Bukhari stated that in the judgement, all the points raised by the petitioner had not been answered by the court. In these circumstances, the court had omitted to take notice of points and objections raised by the petitioner before the bench regarding maintainability of review petition and jurisdiction of the court. He requested the court that the concise statement filed by NAB and the petitioners be treated as an integral part of the petition.
End.
|
