The Supreme Court declared PTI chairman’s petition against the NAB amendments admissible. Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandyal said that ladies and gentlemen, two are giving the decision by a majority of one. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, a member of the three-member bench of the Supreme Court, has disagreed with the decision.
Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Atta Bandyal pronounced the verdict in this case on the last day of his tenure. Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandyal said that ladies and gentlemen, two are giving the decision by a majority of one. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, a member of the three-member bench of the Supreme Court, has disagreed with the decision.
Judicial decision
It has been said in the court decision that the application against the NAB amendments is declared admissible, the clause to exclude references up to 500 million from the scope of NAB is declared null and void, however, the clauses to file references against the Service of Pakistan are maintained. are kept.
In its decision, the court said that the cases of all persons sitting in public positions are reinstated, the NAB amendments related to the termination of reference of public positions are declared null and void, the first amendment of section 10 and section 14 of the NAB amendments are null and void. are
The court reinstated all the cases that were closed below the limit of 50 crores and the court said that all closed inquiries, cases are reinstated, all cases should be rescheduled in NAB courts and accountability courts.
The Supreme Court has invalidated some provisions of the NAB amendments.
Order to NAB to send all records to concerned courts within 7 days
The court has ordered NAB to send all the records to the concerned courts within 7 days.
The court said that the NAB amendments made regarding the plea bargain are declared invalid, the orders given by the accountability courts in the light of the NAB amendments are declared invalid.
It may be remembered that Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) had filed a petition against the NAB amendments.
The Supreme Court held 53 hearings on the petition of Chairman PTI Imran Khan.
A 3-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Atta Bandyal had reserved the decision of the case on September 5 and in this regard, Justice Umar Atta Bandyal said that he will decide this important case before retirement.
The three-member bench of the Supreme Court includes Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Mansoor Ali Shah.
#cases #ended #limit #crores #restored #Imran #Khans #request #NAB #amendments #approved
**Interview with Legal Expert Dr. Sarah Malik on the Supreme Court’s Decision Regarding NAB Amendments**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Malik. The Supreme Court recently ruled the petition by PTI chairman against the NAB amendments to be admissible. Can you explain what this ruling entails?
**Dr. Sarah Malik:** Thank you for having me. This ruling signifies that the Supreme Court has decided to hear the PTI chairman’s grievances regarding the changes made to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) laws. Specifically, the court’s decision means they found sufficient ground to consider the arguments against the amendments.
**Interviewer:** The Chief Justice mentioned that the decision was made by a majority of one. What does this mean for the legal implications going forward?
**Dr. Malik:** A majority of one indicates that there was a split opinion within the three-member bench. Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandyal ruled in favor of the admissibility of the petition, while Justice Mansoor Ali Shah had a dissenting opinion. This division could suggest that future rulings might also face similar disputes, and they could evoke further legal challenges depending on how this case evolves in the higher courts.
**Interviewer:** Let’s discuss the content of the ruling. It declared certain clauses of the NAB amendments null and void. How significant is this aspect?
**Dr. Malik:** It’s quite significant. The ruling nullifies the clause that excluded references involving cases up to 500 million from NAB’s jurisdiction, which effectively enhances NAB’s capacity to act against larger allegations of corruption. By reinstating the cases of all individuals in public positions, the court sends a clear message that accountability must be maintained.
**Interviewer:** What impact do you foresee this ruling having on political figures and public perception surrounding accountability in Pakistan?
**Dr. Malik:** This decision may have profound implications for public confidence in accountability mechanisms. Political figures might feel more scrutinized, and this could lead to an atmosphere where accountability is more rigorously enforced. However, public perception will largely depend on the outcomes of the ongoing cases and how these reforms are implemented.
**Interviewer:** given that this decision was made on Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandyal’s last day in office, how might this influence the future direction of the Supreme Court?
**Dr. Malik:** The timing adds a layer of intrigue to the decision, as it could be seen as cementing his legacy as Chief Justice. The incoming leadership will likely have to navigate the implications of this ruling carefully. It sets a precedent that could shape how accountability laws are interpreted and enforced in Pakistan going forward.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Dr. Malik, for your insights into this important legal development.
**Dr. Sarah Malik:** Thank you for having me; it’s an important topic that will continue to evolve.
