Farooq Naeem—AFP
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday barred a special parliamentary body from proceeding against the son of former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Saqib Nisar while directing the government to inform it about those responsible for recording conversations that keep being leaked to media.
“Who records these audios?” asked Justice Babar Sattar while hearing a plea filed by Najam Saqib against a special committee formed by National Assembly Speaker Raja Pervaiz Ashraf to probe audio clips allegedly featuring his voice. Directing the federal government to submit a response by June 19, he also questioned the authority under which the special committee had taken notice of an alleged conversation between two private individuals.
The petition had earlier been rejected by the Registrar’s Office over some objections, but Sattar removed these and also suspended a notice issued to Najam by the special committee.
During the hearing, advocate Latif Khosa—representing the petitioner—informed the court that the rules for the special committee would be the same as for the general committee. The judge remarked that he would need to make the ministry concerned a party to the case to which Khosa said there was no relevant ministry but he would do so. “We only challenged that the speaker and the assembly do not have the authority to look into private matters,” he argued. “The petition does not challenge the matter which is pending in the Supreme Court,” he said, adding that Parliament had no right to examine an alleged conversation between two private individuals.
“You have also been a governor. Tell me, who records these audios?” the judge questioned Khosa, who had previously served as the Punjab governor. “Let the parties answer first, then everything will be clear,” the lawyer responded.
The petition filed by Najam earlier this week had requested the IHC to suspend the special committee’s proceedings and bar it from taking any punitive action. Pleading that the alleged audios breached his privacy and were obtained through illegal surveillance, he urged the court to declare recording of any private person’s personal conversation as a violation of basic human rights. The petition also argued that the special committee formed by the NA speaker was illegal and thus any summons issued by it were likewise invalid.
The IHC registrar’s office had raised objections to the petition, saying the matter was already pending with the Supreme Court and two different types of pleas could not be made in a single petition as the petitioner had simultaneously challenged the notification of the committee and also requested the court to declare the recording of the audio as illegal.