The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Saturday dismissed a review petition seeking contempt of court proceedings against Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz (PML-N) leaders Maryam Nawaz and Shahid Khaqan Abbasi.
The petitioner had contended that the statements made by PML-N leaders against former chief justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar “were tantamount to committing contempt of court”.
Earlier in November 2021, a single bench headed by IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah declared the plea inadmissible saying that: “Criticism of the former chief justice does not fall under contempt of court”. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a review petition before the division bench of the IHC, which upheld the decision announced by Justice Minallah. The IHC division bench comprising Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb and Justice Arbab Muhammad announced the verdict.
The bench remarked that the petitioner failed to tell the court which of the court order was violated by the PML-N leaders. “Contempt of court case is between the court and the contemnor, hence contempt of court proceedings cannot be initiated at the whims of anyone,” the court observed.
PML-N leader Maryam had demanded that former CJP Nisar should tell the nation as to who had “pressured” him to convict her and her father, former premier Nawaz Sharif, in the aftermath of an audio leak of the ex-top judge. “This [case of] judicial interference is the fifth testimony in favour of my father,” she had told reporters at a news conference accompanied by other party leaders.
Separately, Journalist Ansar Abbasi, who is to be indicted on January 7 for reporting on an affidavit that accused former chief justice Saqib Nisar of manipulating the case against ex-prime minister Nawaz Sharif, requested the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Saturday to amend its order.
In a 12-page judgement, released a day earlier, IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah said the journalists “have also implied that the contents of the document were true because otherwise, in the public interest, the news report would not have been published”.
In a plea filed, Abbasi requested the IHC CJ “to delete the relevant paragraph”. He said as per the order the court asked whether “we would report affidavits based on false facts to influence the court proceedings”.
As per the ruling, “our response to this question is that we will report [such news] in the public interest”.
Abbasi said he has never said anything like that, adding that this was probably due to a clerical error or miscommunication on his part. “I can never think of saying something like that,” he added.
He said he only reported the existence of the affidavit as the report published in the newspaper never claimed the contents of the document were true. Abbasi said he published the story in good faith and added that it was not his aim to cast aspersions on judges or influence the proceedings of pending cases.
On Friday, the IHC said that the affidavit “appeared to be an attempt to influence the proceedings, obstruct and interfere with the due administration of justice”, and maintained that publishing of the contentious affidavit, indeed, merited contempt proceedings.
In the written order, the chief justice noted that the questionable contents of the affidavit, the timing, the place of its execution and then its mysterious leak followed by a hasty publication “had likely profound consequences for the proceedings pending before the Court relating to the appeals preferred by the two persons named therein”.
He said the publication and the contents of the affidavit could be prejudicial to the right to fair trial of the two potential beneficiaries named therein and whose appeals were pending and fixed for hearing on November 17. agencies
