ISLAMABAD: Imran Khan might have voiced concerns about the changes to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) statute if he had continued to serve in the National Assembly, according to Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah on Wednesday.
As the hearing on the PTI chairman’s appeal against the most recent changes made to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999 resumed, the judge made this comment while challenging Imran Khan’s choice to leave the National Assembly.
Khan, via his attorney Khawaja Haris, submitted a request under Rule 6 of SC Rules 180 for the inclusion of documents in the case that was filed to contest the NAB Ordinance 1999 changes.”Imran Khan was elected to the [National] Assembly thanks to public support.
How and why was he able to quit the assembly without the consent of his constituents, “Justice Shah made a remark when he heard the appeal with Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial.
If the former prime minister had remained in the parliament, he could have voiced his concerns about the new NAB law, according to him.The remark was made in response to Imran Khan’s attorney Khawaja Haris’ claim that elected officials may only approach the courts if the task wasn’t completed in their respective constituencies.
NAB told the court at the beginning of the hearing that it had decided to take the attorney general’s position on the matter.The accountability laws, according to Imran’s attorney Haris, have been in effect since 1949.
He added that adjustments rendered NAB legislation ineffectual, saying “None of the [modifications] in the accountability laws have offered an exemption to the public representatives.”Justice Shah then asked what the supreme court could do in the event that the NAB law was repealed by the legislature.
Has the SC ever made a decision to bring a legislation that had been repealed back into effect? he inquired. The supreme court had ordered the reintroduction of a law that had been repealed in 1990, Haris then informed the court.
