Disqualification plea: PTI pleads SC to fix hearing next week

Party says whole nation looking at the apex court to deliver on Panama leaks case


Our Correspondent October 10, 2016
Party says whole nation looking at the apex court to deliver on Panama leaks case. PHOTO: EXPRESS

ISLAMABAD: The PTI on Monday requested the Supreme Court to fix the hearing of its constitutional petition, seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and members of his family for their alleged involvement in the Panamagate scandal, next week.

A two-page application has been submitted by PTI chief Imran Khan through Advocate-on-Record (AoR) Chaudhry Akhtar Ali wherein it is ‘prayed’ that the constitutional petition commonly known as the Panama leaks case “may kindly be heard on any date during the week commencing October 17 in the interest of justice”.

“As early as the petition is decided, the better it would be for the country and for citizens of Pakistan,” says the application.

The application states that the constitutional petition relating to the questions falling for the consideration by the court arising out of the Panama leaks have not only attained national importance, but they have also become important internationally.

The PTI also told the Supreme Court that the whole nation is looking at the court to deliver on the Panama leaks case, adding “there are questions in respect of leaders of national importance belonging to different political parties of Pakistan and the prime minister is also from one of those persons against whom there are allegations. From this point of view, the constitutional petition needs early hearing”.

The SC has also admitted three more petitions, filed by Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) and two lawyers Tariq Asad and Barrister Zafarullah on the Panama issue. Interestingly, the JI petition did not name the PM as a respondent in the petition.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 11th, 2016.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ