The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed Imran’s plea which was considered to be the faint constitutional petition filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) on Tuesday for the dis entitlement of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and some other lawmakers in the rouse of the Panama Papers polemic.
SC office dismissed Imran’s plea with objections
Earlier PTI chief on Monday filed a Constitutional petition in the SC, looking for its directives for de-seating the prime minister, his son-in-law Muhammad Safdar and Finance Minister Ishaq Dar from the National Assembly due to their supposed corruption and tax dodging through offshore companies.
Though, the SC registrar on Tuesday returned the PTI’s plea by raising five objections. The registrar office held that the plea prima facie appeared to be frolicsome and the petitioner did not approach any high court for the compensation of grievance in the prompt matter.
The order stated that the petitioner was directly appealing the extraordinary jurisdiction of the SC under Article 184 (3) of Constitution, which is not permissible in view of the SC’s judgment.
“The petitioner (Imran Khan) has not approached any other appropriate forum available to him under the law for the same relief. He has also not provided the justification for not doing so,” it added.
It said the petition prima facie appeared to be frivolous within the contemplation of Rule 5 of Order XXV of the Supreme Court rules 1980, which states that in disposing of any such rule, the court may, in its discretion, make such order for costs as it may consider just and dismissed Imran’s plea.
Reacting to the objections, PTI’s senior leader Ishaq Khan Khakwani said the registrar has no power to accept or reject the petition and it is privilege of the judges to decide on it.
Khakwani further said the legal team will now file an appeal against the registrar’s order. He also expressed anger over declaring the PTI’s petition as ‘frivolous’.
Meanwhile, Attorney General for Pakistan Ashtar Ausaf Ali appreciated the registrar office’s objections and said the SC only amuses those constitutional petitions wherein the matter can only be decided without recording the evidences.
Chaudhry Akhtar Ali, advocate on record (AoR) in the SC, opposed that after retirement of former CJP Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, the registrar office was raising such kind of objections to discourage the trend of filing constitutional petitions under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.