ISLAMABAD: A constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday remarked that the law does not allow anyone to tap someone’s phone without the permission of the court.
A seven-member constitution bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan heard several cases. Other members of the bench included Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel, Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afgan, Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan and Justice Musrat Hilali.
While hearing the case related to the phone tapping of the judges, the bench issued notices to the advocate generals of the four provinces and adjourned the hearing of the case till date. Earlier, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar inquired whether there was any legislation regarding phone tapping. The Additional Attorney General (AAG) told the bench that the law has been in place since 2013, adding that the ISI and IB had been informed as per the law.
He said that the procedure of phone tapping has also been mentioned under the law. Justice Mazhar said that according to law only the court can allow phone tapping, and asked the law officer if any judge was informed on this account. The AAG, however, told the bench that he was not aware of it.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel remarked that the law of phone tapping is vague, the decision of the case will affect many pending cases. The Advocate on Record (AOR) informed the bench that the petitioner in the case could not be contacted as his lawyer had passed away last year. Later, the court adjourned the hearing of the case indefinitely.
Also, the Supreme Court adjourned till January 2025 the hearing of petitions filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) against the alleged rigging of the general elections held on February 8, 2024, besides other petitions on the same issue. Rejected. Prosecution
The bench then heard a petition filed by PTI leader and MNA Sher Afzal Marwat. His counsel, Advocate Hanif Rahi, told the bench that the Registrar’s Office had filed objections to his application. However, he added, his client was not aware of these objections and could not file his reply. He requested that he be provided with a copy of the objections, which were raised by the office of the SC Registrar. The bench directed the office to provide a copy of the registrar’s objections and adjourned the matter till January 2025.
The same stand was taken by Hamid Khan before the bench, on which the bench adjourned the matter till January next year while directing his office to provide a copy of the registrar’s objections to the petitioner. Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel asked the counsel to contact the Advocate on Record (AOR), adding that the bench had already issued a notice to the petitioner. Hamid replied that the AOR may not have received the copy of objections from the Registrar’s office and hence he was also unaware of it.
Similarly, the bench also dismissed the non-prosecution petitions filed by Mehmood Akhtar Naqvi, Qayyum Khan and Mian Shabbir against the alleged rigging of the 2024 general elections as they could not appear before the bench.
Meanwhile, the bench, while hearing a civil miscellaneous petition (CMA) related to electoral reforms and electronic voting system, disposed of the matter as infructuous. DG Law, Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) told the bench that electronic voting system was used in the 2018 general elections and a report in this regard was also submitted in Parliament. Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel asked Hamid Khan to raise the matter before the Senate Parliamentary Committee. Later, the court disposed of the case as inconclusive.
Separately, the bench also dismissed a petition filed by former Supreme Court judge Mazahir Ali Akbar Naqvi against the show-cause notice issued to him by the Supreme Judicial Commission. Naqvi’s counsel Saad Hashmi told the bench that he could not get in touch with the client, and sought time to get instructions in this regard.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar asked the lawyer if he wanted to do anything new in this case but he said that the decision of the Supreme Judicial Council has already come. The court dismissed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi’s non-appearance petition.