The Supreme Court of Pakistan Monday expressed resentment over absence of Attorney General Ashraf Ausaf during hearing related to interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.
ISLAMABAD, (Pakistan Point News - 12th Feb, 2018) : The Supreme Court of Pakistan Monday expressed resentment over absence of Attorney General Ashraf Ausaf during hearing related to interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution. A five-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJ) heard the case during which, Additional Attorney General Rana Waqar informed the court that Ashraf Ausaf is in Lahore due to the death of noted human rights lawyer Asma Jahangir.
CJP said that all the lawyers and judges are sad over her demise but the Attorney General cannot be facilitated in this matter as he has to appear in the court till 4pm today. Justice Saqib has also fined him Rs10,000. Rana Waqar said that Ashraf Ausaf is scheduled to leave for London tomorrow. Earlier, Mian Saqib Nisar had admitted that article 62 (1) (F) is ambiguous and difficult to define. Arguing on behalf of disqualified MP Rai Hassan Nawaz, lawyer Asma Jahangir contended that there was no such thing as disqualification for voters.
She said that it was very difficult to judge someone’s character based on technicalities in declarations. She told the court that Rai Hassan Nawaz was disqualified on the basis of allegedly hiding assets which he had not even possessed. The company asset in question had been sold as the company was not owned by Rai Hassan. Justice Umer Ata Bandial said that the court could solve questions having a concrete basis only. “Does the question of Article 62 (1) (F) have a concrete basis?” asked Justice Bandial.
Asma Jehangir suggested that the court take articles 62 and 63 simultaneously into account and set the duration of disqualification till 5 years. She also suggested to mete out different punishments depending on the extent of transgression and dishonesty. Justice Ejazul Hasan remarked that it was the court’s discretion to determine the duration and extent of the punishments. “How would a person declared dishonest become honest after 5 years?” he asked. He said that the parliamentarians do not want dishonest and untruthful persons in the house.
