
IHC issues contempt notices to PM Shehbaz, cabinet in Dr. Aafia case
Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday issued contempt of court notices to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and members of his federal cabinet over non-compliance in the case concerning efforts for the release of Dr Aafia Siddiqui.
The court directed the federal government to submit a response within two weeks.
A written order, authored by Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, noted a pattern of repeated executive defiance and interference in judicial functions.
"Despite the court order, the federal government failed to submit reasons before the court," the IHC said. "The court has no option left but to issue a contempt of court notice to the federal government."
Justice Ejaz remarked that the judiciary had been under persistent attack.
'We have witnessed one attack after another on the pillars of justice. These attacks have repeatedly wounded the justice system and brought it to the verge of collapse.'
He further stated, 'today, yet another example of assault on the judiciary has come to light.'
Referring to administrative interference in the court's functioning, Justice Ejaz observed, 'justice delivery by one high court judge was being controlled through a weekly roster under the office of the Chief Justice.'
'This situation is both horrifying and absurd at the same time,' he said. 'It is a contradiction that has now become the hallmark of this high court.'
Justice Ejaz also recalled that since the 26th Constitutional Amendment, a so-called 'demolition squad' had been effectively brought into the high court.
'The executive's tricks became evident elsewhere,' he said, adding that court proceedings were being restricted through the roster mechanism.
He pointed out that judges wishing to hear cases during judicial vacations were denied permission by the court's administration.
'If a judge wishes to hold court during vacations to deliver justice, the high court administration will not permit it,' he said.
The judge added that the government had been given ample opportunity to comply.
'The court had given the government an opportunity to present its report,' Justice Ejaz said.
The Assistant Attorney General was warned earlier that contempt proceedings would be initiated if the report was not filed.
Rather than submit the report, the government filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the order to submit an amended application, the court noted.
'For whatever reason, the Supreme Court did not hear the government's case,' Justice Ejaz remarked.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Express Tribune
Senators decry judicial overreach
A 12-member panel, headed by Adviser to PM on NHLH Irfan Siddiqui, was constituted by PM. PHOTO: FILE Listen to article The Senate on Friday took exception to the Islamabad High Court's (IHC) move to issue stay orders on matters under discussion in parliamentary committees. Terming it a serious breach of privilege, the lawmakers called for the matter to be referred to the Senate's Committee on Rules of Procedure and Privileges. They also urged that the attorney general be summoned to explain the judiciary's overreach into parliamentary affairs. During the session, chaired by Senator Irfan Siddiqui, Senator Saleem Mandviwalla of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) objected to the stay orders issued by the IHC and Lahore High Court (LHC) against upper house proceedings. "I have never seen stay orders against parliamentary proceedings before. This should be taken seriously," he said, urging the Senate to summon the attorney general. "We never interfere in court proceedings, but judges issuing stay orders against committee actions is direct interference in Parliament. It's becoming a joke." Shahadat Awan supported the call. "We will seek input from the law minister and summon the attorney general for clarification and action." Senator Anusha Rehman said such actions violated Article 66 of the Constitution and constituted a breach of privilege. "Issuing a stay order against a member of Parliament is a direct attack on their privilege," she said, urging the House to refer the matter to the privileges committee and have those responsible appear before it. "No one can stop us from speaking in this House," she added. Senator Kamran Murtaza expressed concern over reports of lawyers being picked up in Balochistan. "If someone has committed a crime, they should be punished under the law," he said. The Presiding Officer responded that a report on the matter would be sought.


Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business Recorder
PARTLY FACETIOUS: ‘Have we ever been rated as investment grade?'
'Hallelujah!' 'Hallelujah is Hebrew and can be broken down into two words – halel means joyous song, praise, and Yah is a shortened form of Yahweh or Jehovah, Allah.' 'Why did you do that?' 'Do what? I merely translated…' 'Why did you translate the Hebrew Yahweh into the Muslim Allah?' 'Dear me, learn to distinguish between Judaism as a religion and Zionism as a policy of a state that justifies genocide and…' 'It's hard given what Israel is doing, but anyway that's not why I said Hallelujah.' 'I know why you said it. Because we have been upgraded by Standard and Poor's from CCC (substantial risk) to B- (highly speculative) which, as per the definition on their website, retains us in the junk category.' 'I believe we would need six more upgrades to get out of the junk category and into the investment grade category.' 'Have we ever been rated as investment grade?' 'Never, I believe the highest rating we got was B+.' 'There you go so we need only two more upgrades to reach the historic high.' 'Why do you keep the bar so low?' 'Why do you take it up so high – I mean to me, it means that you are succumbing to hopelessness and last I heard this is not the Islamic way and…' 'I was merely trying to point out to the SPs that it's rather a long road and…' 'SPs?' 'Same Pagers – we need to aim higher than the historic high, and we need…' 'OK, but remember one thing. In a world gone crazy…' 'Yes, but there is change – the under 40s in the West including the US, and President Trump's support base are all challenging the Israel First Policy of successive US administrations…' 'That has not changed policy yet, that would require another twenty to thirty years, when these under 40s take over the reins of government and…' 'Hamm and you have Germany that allowed the US to blow up the Nordstream pipeline that had supplied cheap Russian fuel to German industries resulting in German deindustrialization, you have Ursula Von Der Layen, a German heading the European Union, hell-bent to compel member states to borrow hundreds of billions to set up a defence industry capable of fighting Russia, and…' 'Hatred does more harm to the hater than the hatee I reckon, and especially when there is unreasoning hatred….' 'I heard the cabinet collectively hates The Man Who Must Remain…' 'Good that you mentioned collective, because the 2016 Supreme Court verdict in the Mustafa Impex case insisted that the cabinet instead of the prime minister can take a decision…' 'Don't be facetious.' 'Hallelujah.' Copyright Business Recorder, 2025


Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business Recorder
SC rejects Commissioner IR's plea against LHC order
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court dismissed the petition of Commissioner Inland Revenue against the Lahore High Court (LHC) order, saying the findings on facts does not suffer from any illegality or error. The petitioner department had assailed the LHC, Rawalpindi bench's order dated 26.03.2025, whereby, reference application filed under Section 47 of the Sales Tax 1990 by the petitioner against the order dated 4.01.2024 passed by the Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue (ATIR), Islamabad, was dismissed. A two-judge bench of Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi heard Commissioner Inland Revenue's appeal. The court noted that the show cause notice and the Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner Inland Revenue in the instant case, against the respondents (M/s Mustafa Enterprises) are based on vague and frivolous allegations and certain conclusions have been made on mere presumptions only, whereas, no material or evidence has been produced to substantiate the same. The court further noted that while passing the Order-in-Original, the Assistant Commissioner Inland Revenue exceeded his jurisdiction while travelling beyond the very premises and the allegations made in the show cause notice, whereas, the respondents were never confronted with any such allegations or entries as reflected in the bank statement which were subsequently furnished by the respondents, showing the details of the total amount and the particulars of suppliers from whom purchases were made. It observed that while initiating the proceedings against the respondents, there was no material or evidence available on record to make out a case against the respondents of illegal or inadmissible claim of input tax adjustment, whereas, the entire proceedings and the Order-in-Original passed in the instant case was based on presumptions, whereas, no inquiry or verification was made by the department in respect of alleged fake/flying invoices. The SC judgment said that the ATIR and the Division Bench of LHC were justified to set aside both the Order-in-Original and the Order-in-Appeal, while recording concurrent findings on facts which does not suffer from any illegality or error. The proceedings in the instant matter were initiated by Deputy Commissioner Inland Revenue Unit-IV Cantt Zone RTO, Rawalpindi vide show cause notice dated 10.08.2021, whereby, the respondents were required to submit the record to prove as to whether the purchases made for the (Tax Period July 2019 to June 2020) amounting to Rs323,722,601 against which an amount of Rs55,032,846 was claimed as input tax, were actually made by them. It was further alleged in the show-cause notice that the record submitted by the respondents does not prove as to whether such purchases were actually made by the respondents during subject period, therefore, they have also failed to comply with the requirements of Section 73 of the Act. It was concluded that respondents did not purchase any coal from the local suppliers and unlawfully claimed input tax on the basis of fake/ flying invoices issued by the dubious suppliers, therefore, caused loss to the national exchequer to the tune of Rs55,032,846 by violating the provisions 6,7,8,22,23,26 and 73 read with Section 2(37) of the Act. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025