Report on JIT being run by ISI: SC seeks reply within two weeks

[ahlam1399]

Report on JIT being run by ISI: SC seeks reply within two weeks

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday issued show-cause notice to Jang Group for contacting one of its judges on landline to inquire about the involvement of ISI in looking after the affairs of Joint Investigation Team (JIT) which was probing the PanamaLeaks matter.
A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and comprising Justice Dost Muhammad Khan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah heard contempt case against Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman and Mir Javed Rahman, Editor-in-Chief and Publisher/Printer of Jang Group respectively.
The court issued show-cause notices to Jang Group after Ahmed Noorani, senior reporter of The News, refused to tender unconditional apology for his story published in ?The News? on July 6, 2017 with the caption, ?SC directs ISI to look after affairs of JIT.?
Noorani submitted that he had already regretted in his reply and had left himself at the mercy of the court.
?Apologising means admitting to committing a wrong and even of having mala fide intention?, Ahmed Noorani contended before the court.
Noorani further submitted that he always respected the court and would always hold the apex court in the highest esteem.
?Apologising will give an impression that he had mala fide intention against Supreme Court judge which was not the case and thus apologising will be even against the respect and dignity of the court?, Noorani contended.
The court then issued show cause notices to Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman, Mir Javed Rahman, Editor-in-Chief and Publisher/Printer Jang Group respectively and Ahmed Noorani with the direction to submit their replies within two weeks and directed them to appear in-person on the next date of hearing. The court changed the contempt of court notice into show-cause notice.
In his story, Mr Noorani while quoting JIT sources had reported that the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was in control of secretarial and administrative affairs of the Panama Joint Investigation Team (JIT) as it was not acting on its own but on the direction of the Supreme Court (SC).
To confirm the said report, Ahmed Noorani had approached the registrar of the Supreme Court, sending some questions however the registrar didn?t respond to written questions.
Mr Noorani then contacted Justice Ejaz Afzal, the head of the implementation bench, and asked him about allowing the JIT to take secretarial support mainly from the ISI, he did not comment but said if anyone was aggrieved, he should approach him in the court. ?I only speak through my judgments or in the court,? he said.
Last year on July 10, a three-member bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan and comprising Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed and Justice Ijazul Ahsen, while hearing the Panama Papers case on July 10 issued contempt of court notices to the Jang Group Editor-in-Chief Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman, Publisher/Printer Mir Javed Rahman for misrepresenting its order in ?Jang? on June 20, 2017 relating to an application filed by Hussain Nawaz seeking two reliefs including stopping the JIT from video recording of the proceedings relating to examination and interrogation of the witnesses and constitution of a commission to inquire into the circumstances leading to the leakage of his footage, which the court had deferred until a reply from Attorney General viz-a-viz the inquiry Report as to the leakage of image was received.
The court had also issued contempt notice to Ahmed Noorani, reporter of The News for contacting Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan on landline to inquire about the involvement of ISI in looking after the affairs of the JIT.
The court, had directed Mir-Shakil-ur-Rahman, Mir Javed Rahman and Ahmed Noorani to submit their replies and asked them to appear before it in-person.
In pursuance of the court?s direction, Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman, Mir Javed Rahman and Ahmed Noorani had submitted their replies and contended that Jang Group had not committed contempt and it?s beyond its imagination to think of subscribing to any sort of notion which had the potential to be detrimental to the administration of justice, respect of judges or had a remote possibility of being contemptuous.
It was further submitted that Jang Group was determined to maintaining efforts for upholding the independence and dignity of the judiciary and supremacy of the Constitution and law and could not even think of ridiculing the judges.
On Wednesday, the court observed that, during the course of preliminary hearing, respondent No 3 (Ahmed Noorani) had expressed regret over the newspaper Report prepared by him and published in The News on July 6, 2017.
The court while dictating its order asked him to tender unconditional apology under Section 5 of Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003, the respondent No.3 hesitated for a while and then stated clearly that he did not want to apology as it would be tantamount to acceptance on his part mala fide contention.
The court also noted down in its order that it had come to the court?s notice that on 06-07-2017 a story had prepared and published by the reporter in The News titled, ?SC directs ISI to look after affairs of JIT?.
In the said report, the court noted that it was categorically stated by respondent No.3 that supervision of administrative affairs of JIT set in Panama case were given to ISI and the same was on the basis of the direction issued by this court.
?When we inquired from the respondent No.3 to support the Report with any material but he utterly failed to do so and did not refer any order of this court wherein this direction was given?, the court ruled in its order.
After the court dictated its order, Ahmed Noorani however, contested this and submitted before the court that neither the bench asked him this nor even this issue was discussed with him during the proceedings. At this, Justice Khosa said that he would soften words of the order.
?We prima facie feel that the said Report may independently constitute contempt of court under Article 204 of Constitution read with Section 3 of Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003?, the court ruled in its order.
The court ruled that in addition to the notice issued to respondents No 3 on 10-07-2017 let a show cause-notice be issued to respondents in view of the Report published as well on July 6, 2017.
The court directed that respondents might submit reply within two weeks and in person on the next date of hearing.
Earlier at the outset of the hearing, the court while reading the reply of journalist Ahmad Noorani agreed that conversation between Noorani and the Supreme Court judge Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan took place in a good environment.
Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa observed that this notice could be withdrawn if journalist Ahmad Noorani sought an unconditional apology.
Ahmed Noorani however, maintained that apologising meant admitting to committing a wrong and even of having mala fide intention. Noorani contended that as his intention was never mala fide and intent was just to confirm an information in the public interest so he would not apologise.
Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa said that under the contempt law for withdrawal of notice, the person facing contempt had to apologise.
He further said that the word used in the law is ?apologise? so notice could only be withdrawn if journalist Ahmad Noorani would apologise.
In response, Noorani however, submitted that the notice was also issued under the said law and if it was not issued on the basis of facts, it could be withdrawn.
He further submitted that he always respected the court and would always hold the apex court in the highest esteem. He said apologising would give an impression that he had mala fide intention against Supreme Court judge which was not the case and thus apologising would be even against the respect and dignity of the court.
In pursuance of the court order, Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman and Mir Javed Rahman, Editor-in-Chief and Publisher/Printer Jang Group respectively appeared before the court.
Counsel for Jang Group submitted before the court that their clients had filed their replies and they are present in the courtroom as well.
Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa said that they are hearing the case for the first time.
Attorney General Ashter Ausaf submitted before the court that contempt notices were issued to the respondents for misrepresenting the court order in ?Jang? on June 20, 2017 relating to an application filed by Hussain Nawaz seeking two reliefs including stopping the JIT from video recording of the proceedings relating to examination and interrogation of the witnesses and constitution of a commission to inquire into the circumstances leading to the leakage of his footage, which the court had deferred until a reply from attorney general viz-a-viz the inquiry Report as to the leakage of image was received.
The learned attorney general also read the replies submitted by Mir Shakil-ur-Rehman and Mir Javed Rehman, Editor-in-Chief and Publisher/Printer Jang Group respectively as well as the stories published in Daily The News and Daily Jang on the order passed by the court on June 20, 2017.
Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa after listening to AG said as what was wrong with this news adding that apparently, only the headline was wrong on which notices were served.
?Now read out the news from The News?, Justice Khosa asked AG at which the AG read out the headline ?SC directs ISI to look after affairs of JIT?.
?This seems a serious issue and the reporter said that he had taken the information from the sources of JIT.?
At this counsel for Jang Group told the court that the notice issued by the court did not mention this story. Justice Khosa however said that the court would come to this point but let them read the whole story.
Justice Khosa observed that apparently, the objection to this story was that the court had allowed all this. He questioned as to whether there was any verdict in place wherein the court had issued directives to the ISI.
The AG said that the reporter be asked for the source of the news. Justice Khosa however, said that they did not ask for the source but would ask for the contents and evidence.
Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa after going through the reply of Ahmed Noorani observed that Mr Noorani had admitted that he had contacted the judge on phone with the contention that he tried to make a sincere effort contacting the learned judge for the confirmation of the said news.
Justice Khosa observed that only the headline of Daily Jang was not in accordance with the court order while the news published in The News on June 20 was not the part of the notice.
Justice Dost Muhammad Khan, another member of the bench observed that though he was not the part of that bench but the other day he read all the newspapers having published the news in same manner.
The reporter did some mistake and reported that the applications were dismissed.
Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa observed that reporters are very hardworking and most of the reporting are based on facts but some time it is difficult to understand English language that?s why there might be some mistake and there is also a language problem.
He further said that reporters are hardworking and sometime mistakes take place and said there should not be mala fide intention.
He said that in England, court reporters are properly trained and there are courses for the court reporters.
Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa observed that the purpose of contempt law is not to punish anyone but to realise that judiciary should be respected.
Attorney General Ashter Ausaf submitted before the court that an apology is not good enough.
He said that the demeanour of the contemner and his past deeds are also to be considered, adding that it is also to be seen.
?It is equally important that majesty of law should not be compromised,? AG submitted.
During the course of hearing, Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa repeatedly told Ahmed Noorani to tender apology saying the reply he submitted and regret is not acceptable.
?There is a word apology in the contempt law but not regret?, Justice Khosa said adding that they are saying this after going through the whole replies.
?Make consultation with your lawyer if you want to proceed and there is also a story of July 6, 2017 which was an open threat, so tender apology?, Justice Khosa asked Noorani.
Noorani however, submitted that he had already regretted and had left himself at the mercy of the court.
Justice Khosa asked Noorani that he had leveled allegation against the judiciary in his story of July 6, 2017. Noorani however, contended that the story was six-month old and there was no allegation in that story.Meanwhile, the court directed the respondents to submit their replies within two weeks and adjourned further hearing until February 7.



أكثر...

??????? ??????: Report on JIT being run by ISI: SC seeks reply within two weeks || ??????: ahlam1399 || ??????: اسم منتداك

https://hameed.nwar.uk/vb

كلمات البحث

العاب ، برامج ، سيارات ، هاكات ، استايلات