LHC puts off hearing in contempt petition against Zardari

LAHORE: A five-member bench of the Lahore High Court on Wednesday adjourned the hearing of contempt petition against President Asif Ali Zardari till December 20,with a direction to Attorney General of Pakistan to forward his arguments on Article 248(2), on next date of hearing.

The bench headed by LHC Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial was hearing the contempt petition filed by Muneer Ahmad Khan against President Asif Ali Zardari for not complying with the court order in dual office case.

Earlier, Attorney General of Pakistan Irfan Qadir appearing before the bench informed that Federation's counsel Waseem Sajjad was busy before the Apex Court today.

To a court query regarding effects of Article 248(2),the AGP submitted that he would address maintainability issue first. "If contempt petition was not maintainable then there was no question of Article 248(2)," he added.

After bench's permission to formulate points on maintainability, the AGP said that the president was not obligated to do anything which he was not obligated under the constitution.

He said that the president could not be forced to do anything which was unconstitutional.

He said that the court must probe into the credentials of the petitioners first before probing their allegations.

"Who are persons raising such issues as it had strong effects",
he added.

He said that petitioners had history of filing such petitions including plea on Kalabagh Dam wherein they misguided the court.

At this stage, exchange of words took place between the chief justice and AGP. However, the AGP continuing his arguments, said that the court was being dragged in political issues." The court should exercise restrain in entertaining contempt applications, especially if these had political repercussions", he said and added that such things should
be avoided for the sake of democracy.

The bench questioned AGP to explain how a court order
could start confrontation.

The AGP referring to Nawaz Sharif case and others contended that these were politically motivated and present contempt case was not different as the petitioners were putting a lot of efforts.

He contended that the order in dual office case was not implementable and it was the reason that a petitioner withdrew his writ of probation. "What is the status of contempt, if order could not be implemented", he added.

The AGP said that the court used word "expectation" in dual office case verdict instead of direction or order." The person whom ordered referred may take it differently", he contended and added that petitioner was dragging court in contempt against highest office.

"The court knows its limitations, therefore, the word expectation was used," the bench remarked.

The AGP said that dual office case verdict lacked clarity as the court did not have legal assistance from other side." The constitution does not bar president to have political links", he said and added "The courts could not rewrite the Constitution.

Referring to judges code of conduct, he said that the case did not deal with law point but it was a political issue and judges should avoid to engage in political controversy.

The AGP said that the petitioners stance was based on the Supreme Court Verdicts in Asghar Khan and Contempt of court cases but the government had filed review petitions on both the cases and let the review petitions be decided first.

However, the bench observed that the SC verdicts had re-enforced dual office verdict and no interim relief had been granted to the government in said review petitions.

The AGP requested the court to decide maintainability of contempt petition first but the court directed AGP to argue on Article 248(2) as it was essential to decide maintainability. The bench adjourned further