ISLAMABAD:
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday overruled the registrar office’s objections on Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Vice President Maryam Nawaz’s application in the Avenfield Apartments acquittal plea.
However, the maintainability of the application will be decided by the judiciary in a later hearing.
The PML-N leader has maintained in her plea that the country’s premier intelligence agency’s incumbent chief played a role in her conviction as well as her father, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, and husband, Captain (retd) Safdar, in the case.
A division bench of the IHC led by Justice Amir Farooq heard the application.
Maryam’s counsel, Irfan Qadir, appeared before the bench and rejected the impression that the PML-N leader was against the armed forces.
“I want to clarify that our armed forces and the Inter-Services Intelligence are the best in the world. Similarly, our judges are great too, except in a few political matters,” the counsel maintained, adding that they were not against individuals “but certain mindsets that silence democracy in Pakistan”.
Qadir stated that they moved the application to bring forth certain facts that happened after the conviction in the Avenfield case.
Read Maryam draws public flak for targeting security institutions
The bench noted that the registrar’s office had raised two objections that are being overruled.
A day earlier, Maryam had filed a separate petition in the high court against the verdict given by an accountability court in the Avenfiled Apartments case.
Maryam, through her counsel urged the high court to declare the accountability court’s decision in the Avenfield Apartments case void over “serious violations”.
Maryam and Nawaz Sharif were convicted in the case on July 6, 2017, by Accountability Court Judge Muhammad Bashir, who sentenced them to seven and 10 years in jail, respectively. The IHC later suspended their sentences.
In her plea, Maryam also alluded to a speech made by former judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui during a bar address. In the speech, Siddiqui had alleged that the SC was being controlled from “the outside” while hearing the Avenfield case. He was subsequently sacked over misconduct.
Comments are closed.