Justice Isa case: Detailed SC judgement names PM, others

g5

Islamabad: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has released the detailed judgement on the review petitions in the Justice Qazi Faes Isa case.

The judgement holds Shahzad Akbar and Law Minister Farogh Naseem responsible for issuing “unlawful” directions and Prime Minister Imran Khan for retaining the two officials in positions of authority.

The apex court in June 2020 had thrown out a presidential reference against Justice Isa, but seven of the 10 judges on the bench ordered the Inland Revenue Department and the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to seek explanations from the judge’s wife Sarina Isa and children on the funding for three properties in their names in the United Kingdom and submit a report to the Supreme Judicial Council Secretary.

Justice Isa, Sarina Isa and several lawyers bodies filed review petitions against the order. Consequently, the Supreme Court in its short order on April 26, 2021, allowed all of the review petitions except one and recalled the directions issued in the earlier court orders for a tax probe against Justice Isa’s wife Sarina Isa and their children.

The apex court had also ruled that “all the subsequent proceedings, actions, orders and reports made in pursuance of the said directions are declared to be of no legal effect and/or consequences.”

Now the Supreme Court of Pakistan has issued a detailed judgement, which names Shahzad Akbar, who recently stepped down as Special Advisor to the PM on Accountability, and Farogh Naseem, who is still the law minister.

In the detailed judgement released on Saturday, the court has recorded the reasons for its April 2021 ruling.

The judgement begins with a “preface” which states that there had been “efforts to discredit [judges] by creating doubts about their personal integrity” and that “such efforts go beyond the person of the judge and undermine public trust and public confidence in the judicial institution.”

About court directions to FBR and Inland Revenue, the judgement said that Supreme Court “cannot pass any direction that would, in essence, prompt or pre-empt the [Supreme Judicial] Council to proceed in a certain manner or refrain it to proceed in any manner as it would, in fact, amount to judicial intervention in the ‘proceedings before the Council’.”

The apex court said that the earlier order by its bench “amounts to judicial interference” in the proceedings of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) and violated SJC’s autonomy.

The judgement, however, also notes that the SJC is “on its own motion, competent to consider or refuse to consider “information” received from “any” source.”

It said that the “directions to the tax officials to inquire into the affairs of the spouse and children of the Petitioner Judge” violated the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001.

The apex court said that tax officials were “competent” to proceed against any judge, and their families but “only in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 and not otherwise on the basis of unlawful directions.”

The court then held Akbar and Naseem responsible for violating Sarina Isa’s confidentiality as a tax filer and for issuing “unlawful” directions. It also said that the prime minister exposed himself to the commission of the violation by retaining the two officials in positions of authority.

A paragraph in the final section of the judgement read: “Section 216 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, commands confidentiality of the information of a tax filer, and breach thereof exposes the delinquent to penal consequences under sections 198 and 199 of the Ordinance. Such consequences are attracted in the present case to those giving the unlawful directions, namely, Chairman ARU, Barrister Mirza Shahzad Akbar with the concurrence of the Federal Law Minister, Dr. Farogh Naseem; the tax officials executing the unlawful directions in breach of section 216 of the Ordinance; and finally, the worthy Prime Minister, who despite clear and unanimous finding of misdoings of the named delinquents by this Court, retained them in positions of authority, thereby blatantly exposed himself to complicity in the commission of the said violation.”

Shahzad Akbar and Farough Naseem have already involved themselves in a pitched legal battle against Sarina Isa. On January 20, they issued a statement saying that they will be issuing a defamation notice to Sarina.