Panamagate case: JI deliberates validity of PM’s NA speech

The Supreme Court on Monday resumed hearing of the Panamagate case, with Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) lawyer Advocate Taufiq Asif arguing Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s speech in the National Assembly last year was against the rules of the House.

Taufiq Asif maintained the Panamagate case is about the Sharif family, not the government. He said that NA Speaker Ayaz Sadiq allowed the PM to deliver a speech after suspending the proceedings of the Lower House, which is against the rules.

During Friday’s hearing, the five-judge bench hearing the case wondered whether the PM’s May 16, 2016, speech was part of the house business agenda.

“Is it proper or is it admissible for the prime minister to appear in the National Assembly to explain about his family business in his speech,” asked Justice Ijazul Hassan.

The observation came after the JI counsel argued that the PM’s speech was not related to the day-to-day proceedings of the National Assembly. Rather, Taufiq said, it should be construed as something of personal nature because the premier used the august floor of the house to explain his family affairs.

The JI’s counsel maintained that the prime minister, through his speech, had unveiled nothing about any state policy on terrorism, National Action Plan, welfare of people or anything about the Quetta incidents.

Rather, he offered and explanation of a personal nature, the counsel said, adding that neither was the speech part of the agenda of the lower house that day, nor was there any finding or ruling of the speaker to dispense with the house agenda, allowing the premier to make the speech.

Justice Asif Saeed Khosa who heads the bench, raised a question about whether the PM’s speech was part of the house proceedings. The JI’s counsel maintained that the speech was not part of the assembly’s agenda that day.

The right to immunity can only be given in light of the law, Taufiq argued.

In today’s hearing, Taufiq remarked there should be a ban on television talk shows and news discussions about the Panamagate case.

In reply to this, Justice Khosa said that a lot has been done and now everyone should wait for the court’s judgement before discussing it on the media.

Advocate Taufiq observed that the way the media portrayed how questions were raised in court on Friday make it look like a judgement had already been passed, to which Justice Khosa responded that questions are asked for the purpose of clarification and are not a verdict.

Source: Dawn