Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s senior counsel has stated in the Supreme Court that the confidential information related to the judge’s properties had been given to the complainant without approval of the lawful authority.
Advocate Muneer Malik, while pleading Justice Isa’s petition before a full court bench of the SC, said that the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) shared confidential information related to the judge’s properties in the United Kingdom with Abdul Waheed Dogar.
According to a report in Dawn, the senior counsel stated, “The information regarding three properties in the United Kingdom was acquired through surveillance during the interregnum period between the Feb 6 announcement of Tehreek-i-Labaik Pakistan-dharna verdict and the filing of the complaint.”
Advocate Muneer Malik also said that Dogar had filed a complaint before the Assets Recovery Unit (ARU) when he was not even a civil servant. He further reminded the court that in the case against former SC chief justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, the president had authorised the filing of the reference.
Moreover, the advocate told the court that Dogar, in his complaint, had shared the online search results acquired through London’s land registry about property owned by Justice Isa’s wife, whose name Dogar did not even know.
Malik further emphasised the fact that properties under UK laws could only be searched online if the person under whose name the property was registered or someone authorised by a court of law moved the application.
In response, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, who was presiding over the hearing, stated that the counsel was perhaps advocating that the complainant was supplied with the information as he was a ‘proxy’.
Justice Isa’s counsel added that the investigation against the judge had been carried out through eavesdropping, snooping and complete surveillance of his family members.
He said that such a method of collecting material and evidence would set a trend whereby any SHO might be able to launch investigations against judges.
Advocate Munir emphasised that such a trend would negate the concept of the separation of the executive from the judiciary.