The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Saturday declared a petition “frivolous” that had sought suspension of accountability court proceedings against former prime minister Nawaz Sharif on account of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB)’s order to hold an inquiry against him for the alleged transfer of $4.9 billion to India
IHC’s Justice Athar Minallah stated that petitioner Shahid Orakzai’s petition had been found frivolous.
“The petitioner, by filing such petitions, may expose himself to imposition of exemplary costs,” Justice Minallah stated in the order.
In the petition, Orakzai had pleaded the court to instruct the accountability court to suspend proceedings against ousted premier Nawaz Sharif on grounds that NAB had named him in the “controversial” press release issued on May 8.
He maintained that the impugned press release intended to damage the political standing of the former PM at a time when his party was gearing up for the next general election.
In the judgment, Justice Minallah noted that the petition was fixed as an objection case, petitioner appeared in person and claimed to be a public-spirited person.
“Frivolous and unwanted adjudication is discouraged, particularly when it involves political content,” Justice Minallah stated in the order.
“The present petitioner has not only utilised the time of functionaries of this court in processing his petition but has also taken the precious time, which otherwise should have been availed by other bona fide litigants who anxiously await for the dispensation of justice,” Justice Minallah’s order read.
“Such frivolous litigation, besides exposing the institution of judiciary to unwarranted political controversies, at the same time infringes upon the fundamental rights of bona fide litigants and inevitably impedes their rights of access to justice,” he added.
Justice Minallah stated in the order that the public spirit of the petitioner was not disputed but he was advised to raise his grievances having political content before other appropriate forums. While declaring it “frivolous”, Justice Minallah noted that despite his exuberance relating to matters of public importance, he could not satisfy the court regarding maintainability of the petition.
Subsequently, the judge also gave him a lecture about Article 199 of constitution, saying it was of extraordinary nature. He said that the constitution had conferred the power on the high courts for enforcement of fundamental rights.
In addition, the judge said, the power includes issuance of orders, directions or writs of five kinds – habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition and quo warranto. “The jurisdiction being discretionary and extraordinary is exercised in grave cases rather than in routine,” Justice Minallah stated.
Published in Daily Times, May 20th 2018.
