Concerns over the removal of names from the Exit Control List (ECL) were aired by a five-member Supreme Court bench Friday, who heard an unusual case on fears that criminal justice may be subverted by those in positions of responsibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Munib Akhtar, Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Mohammad Ali Mazhar make up the bench led by Pakistan’s Chief Justice, Umar Ata Bandial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It took place on May 18 after the PTI accused the coalition government of influencing several investigations and shifting investigators or personnel in charge of such cases, notably those involving corruption charges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A federal appeals court has halted the transfer, posting, or removal of individuals engaged in high-profile investigations or prosecutions of high-ranking government officials now pending in the courts of special judges (central) or accountability courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To the interior secretary and other officials, notices were also sent to federal investigators (FIA, NAB) and the head of the prosecution branch in both agencies, as well as to prosecutors across the country’s provinces, as well as to advocates general in the provinces and the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He said that on April 22, 2022, amendments were made to the ECL Rules and that the names of people implicated in corrupt practises of Rs10 million had been deleted off the ECL list.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Asked by Justice Ahsan, Justice Akhtar inquired as to whether the Cabinet Division announcement regarding the change in regulations said that they might be applied to names added in the past, and if so, whether it stated so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Naqvi inquired, “Who benefited from the rules?”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Akhtar further pointed out that it would be a conflict of interest for a cabinet member who was currently under investigation to approve the rule modification. For the court to see, he requested the names of those in the government who had received financial aid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Disassociated” himself from the modifications, he said, referring to a member who was now being prosecuted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When 174 people’s names were removed off the ECL, the CJP pointed out that the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) had claimed it had not been notified beforehand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to section 2 of Pakistan’s ECL Rules, 2010, which deals with reasons for prohibiting individuals from travelling from Pakistan to a destination outside the country, the chief justice requested that Attorney General Ashtar Ausaf read it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Those accused of corruption, terrorism, tax evasion, and debt default cannot leave the country, according to the regulations. Is this change in cabinet policy against tax evaders and those accused of corruption the result of a specific request? “he inquired.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to the Attorney General, he will deliver the cabinet meeting minutes so that they may be approved by the president.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If names are taken off the ECL after 120 days, then yes, according to Justice Ahsan’s question, would they be deleted automatically?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For cabinet members’ convenience
Justice Naqvi noted that the regulations had benefited cabinet members as well. “How can they make changes to benefit themselves?”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Akhtar wondered whether there was a way to prevent a minister from receiving a relevant file while he or she was being investigated. “We are aware that only accusations have been made against federal ministers. However, they should not be present at such sessions.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Ahsan inquired as to whether such modifications could be brought about by a circulating summary, noting that it was the cabinet’s job to make a decision after evaluating each case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The NAB has submitted a report on transfers to the Federal Reserve.
According to Hassan Akbar, the anti-graft watchdog’s lawyer, 174 persons on the no-fly list were put on his suggestion. He claimed that the bureau was not alerted when their names were removed off the ECL.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In response to the CJP’s question on the ECL procedure, the lawyer said that there were SOPs in place before the names could be added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In addition, the anti-corruption watchdog released a thorough report on the transfer of its employees. According to the counsel, the chairman provides orders after a referral for officer transfers from the prosecutor general.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As a result of changes to the ECL guidelines, Justice Mazhar concluded the review process had been completed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As the names of cabinet members were on the ECL, Justice Naqvi questioned if there was a conflict of interest because the cabinet could change it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It was suggested by the AGP that they check with the cabinet members who serve on the Executive Committee to determine whether they attended the meeting where the rules were changed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar has recommended changes to the ECL laws, according to Ausaf Tarar’s client, Justice Naqvi commented, had reaped the benefits of his representation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Justice Bandial, the court will not invalidate the government’s no-fly list determinations. Apex Court would act on proceedings against state, he added. “We don’t want to meddle with administration activities,” he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
PM and CM under investigation by the FIA
The FIA report on Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Punjab Chief Minister Hamza Shehbaz’s money laundering case, which was previously presented to the SC, was also discussed during the proceedings. “The report created the impression that various concerns were handled with in a non-serious way,” remarked Justice Ahsan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sikander Zulfiqar, a prosecutor with the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), was suspended by the law ministry on May 13, according to him. It was revealed that the FIA prosecutors had been suspended for failing to present at two sessions, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Asked by Justice Akhtar whether any of these sessions were held before or after the current administration came into power, Is it true that you told the prosecutors that they were not required to appear in court since they were suspended?” According to Justice Ahsan,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“In order to move the prosecutors, the facts were distorted. When he became unwell a month after his transfer, the officer in charge of the investigation was also replaced “‘Justice Ahsan stated,’<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The CJP noted that Article 248 of the Constitution did not shield ministers from criminal prosecutions and suggested that the FIA team had been moved to put an end to the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to the CJP, criminal procedures against federal ministers should be continued. According to him, the criminal justice system should be the same for everyone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
After then, the hearing was postponed indefinitely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Next, the supreme court ordered the head of the FIA to attend in person at the next hearing. With the record, the FIA’s Director of Law Operations Imran Gondal was also called to appear before the judge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Suo objetivo
An SC judge’s advice to the CJP on suspected interference with the prosecution branch’s independence in the exercise of its powers and responsibilities for investigating and prosecuting ongoing criminal cases involving government officials was given suo motu notice by the CJP<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An official news statement from the Supreme Court said that altering or disappearing evidence in courts or the hands of prosecuting agencies might have a significant impact on the prosecution of criminal cases, as well as the transfer and posting of officials to critical positions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to a press release, these measures, together with “media reports” concerning changes in accountability legislation, are likely to “undermine” the country’s criminal justice system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Because of this, the public’s faith in the rule of law and constitutionality has been undermined. “That [is] equal to a breach of basic rights impacting society as a whole.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It wasn’t made clear in the statement from the SC news office which “pending criminal cases” were being discussed. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Punjab Chief Minister Hamza Shehbaz’s indictment has been postponed since February by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), which is now investigating a money laundering case against them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As the PTI has claimed, the current coalition government has reportedly begun interfering in various cases and moving investigators or employees monitoring investigations, particularly those involving charges of corruption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to the new government’s allies, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) should be abolished or its laws amended, and this is something to keep in mind while discussing this issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A day earlier, the National Assembly had passed a measure including similar alterations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Concerns over the removal of names from the Exit Control List (ECL) were aired by a five-member Supreme Court bench Friday, who heard an unusual case on fears that criminal justice may be subverted by those in positions of responsibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Munib Akhtar, Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Mohammad Ali Mazhar make up the bench led by Pakistan’s Chief Justice, Umar Ata Bandial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It took place on May 18 after the PTI accused the coalition government of influencing several investigations and shifting investigators or personnel in charge of such cases, notably those involving corruption charges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A federal appeals court has halted the transfer, posting, or removal of individuals engaged in high-profile investigations or prosecutions of high-ranking government officials now pending in the courts of special judges (central) or accountability courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To the interior secretary and other officials, notices were also sent to federal investigators (FIA, NAB) and the head of the prosecution branch in both agencies, as well as to prosecutors across the country’s provinces, as well as to advocates general in the provinces and the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He said that on April 22, 2022, amendments were made to the ECL Rules and that the names of people implicated in corrupt practises of Rs10 million had been deleted off the ECL list.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Asked by Justice Ahsan, Justice Akhtar inquired as to whether the Cabinet Division announcement regarding the change in regulations said that they might be applied to names added in the past, and if so, whether it stated so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Naqvi inquired, “Who benefited from the rules?”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Akhtar further pointed out that it would be a conflict of interest for a cabinet member who was currently under investigation to approve the rule modification. For the court to see, he requested the names of those in the government who had received financial aid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Disassociated” himself from the modifications, he said, referring to a member who was now being prosecuted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When 174 people’s names were removed off the ECL, the CJP pointed out that the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) had claimed it had not been notified beforehand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to section 2 of Pakistan’s ECL Rules, 2010, which deals with reasons for prohibiting individuals from travelling from Pakistan to a destination outside the country, the chief justice requested that Attorney General Ashtar Ausaf read it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Those accused of corruption, terrorism, tax evasion, and debt default cannot leave the country, according to the regulations. Is this change in cabinet policy against tax evaders and those accused of corruption the result of a specific request? “he inquired.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to the Attorney General, he will deliver the cabinet meeting minutes so that they may be approved by the president.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If names are taken off the ECL after 120 days, then yes, according to Justice Ahsan’s question, would they be deleted automatically?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For cabinet members’ convenience
Justice Naqvi noted that the regulations had benefited cabinet members as well. “How can they make changes to benefit themselves?”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Akhtar wondered whether there was a way to prevent a minister from receiving a relevant file while he or she was being investigated. “We are aware that only accusations have been made against federal ministers. However, they should not be present at such sessions.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Ahsan inquired as to whether such modifications could be brought about by a circulating summary, noting that it was the cabinet’s job to make a decision after evaluating each case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The NAB has submitted a report on transfers to the Federal Reserve.
According to Hassan Akbar, the anti-graft watchdog’s lawyer, 174 persons on the no-fly list were put on his suggestion. He claimed that the bureau was not alerted when their names were removed off the ECL.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In response to the CJP’s question on the ECL procedure, the lawyer said that there were SOPs in place before the names could be added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In addition, the anti-corruption watchdog released a thorough report on the transfer of its employees. According to the counsel, the chairman provides orders after a referral for officer transfers from the prosecutor general.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As a result of changes to the ECL guidelines, Justice Mazhar concluded the review process had been completed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As the names of cabinet members were on the ECL, Justice Naqvi questioned if there was a conflict of interest because the cabinet could change it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It was suggested by the AGP that they check with the cabinet members who serve on the Executive Committee to determine whether they attended the meeting where the rules were changed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar has recommended changes to the ECL laws, according to Ausaf Tarar’s client, Justice Naqvi commented, had reaped the benefits of his representation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Justice Bandial, the court will not invalidate the government’s no-fly list determinations. Apex Court would act on proceedings against state, he added. “We don’t want to meddle with administration activities,” he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n