ISLAMABAD : Sept 5 : A larger bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP) on Tuesday reserved judgment in NAB amendments case. Chief justice , Umar Atta Bandial, is heading the bench which also comprised of Justice Ejazul Ahsan and Justice Mansoor Ali Shah. Chief Justice , Umar Atta Bandial, while announcing to reserve judgment in the case observed that the judgment in the case will be announced before his retirement.
Chief justice , Umar Atta Bandial, is retiring on September 16 and he is left with only a week to announce the judgment in NAB amendments case. A few days ago, the chief justice of Pakistan had observed that it was a binding on him to finalise the cases which were under being heard by his court prior to his retirement. His these remarks have got attention of many in Pakistan with surprise. Chief Justice , Umar Atta bandial , had faced severe criticism from certain political leaders for his extraordinary remarks during hearings of various cases. His remarks to say “Welcome” to Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf (PTI) chairman, Imran Khan, when he was summoned to the apex court in one of the cases being heard by the Bandial court had stirred a big controversy. Chief Justice Bandial had to explain in the media as to why did he utter the words “Welcome” to Imran Khan. Similarly, Chief Justice of Pakistan remained up to his tradition of making extra ordinary remarks while announcing to reserve judgment in the NAB amendments case.
The amendments made several changes to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999, including reducing the term of the NAB chairman and prosecutor general to three years, limiting NAB’s jurisdiction to cases involving over Rs500 million, and transferring all pending inquiries, investigations, and trials to the relevant authorities
The observations made by the bench on the last day of hearing clearly suggest that the apex court can strike down the amendments made by the parliament in NAB ordinance. In one the hearings into case, the court had sought details of the beneficiaries of the amendments in NAB Ordinance 1999. It suggests that the court had gather feelings that the amendments made by PDM government in NAB ordinance 1999 were person specific.
