Aaj.tv Logo

Plea to form panel to probe ex-CJ’s alleged audiotape adjourned till Jan 14

24 Dec, 2021
In the leaked audio clip, an unidentified individual, allegedly the former CJP, could be heard speaking of collusion to punish ex-PM Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz in order to bring Imran Khan into power. File
In the leaked audio clip, an unidentified individual, allegedly the former CJP, could be heard speaking of collusion to punish ex-PM Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz in order to bring Imran Khan into power. File

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday adjourned the hearing of the petition seeking formation of a commission to investigate former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar’s alleged audiotape till January 14.

IHC CJ Athar Minallah presided over the petition filed by Sindh High Court Bar Association President Salahuddin Ahmed. Ahmed on November 27 had moved the court to form a panel to investigate Nisar’s alleged audiotape.

In the leaked audio clip, an unidentified individual, allegedly the former CJP, could be heard colluding to deny bails to ex-PM Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz till the 2018 general election in order to facilitate Imran Khan' into power. The former top judge had termed the audio as “fabricated”.

According to the Fact Focus website, which broke the story, the audio clip was examined by a leading firm in the US that specialises in multimedia forensics.

Former CJP Nisar’s purported audiotape harmed the status of the judiciary, read the petition, adding that it implied that the judiciary was under the pressure of “foreign forces”.

The petition stresses the importance of reviving the public’s trust in an “independent and unbiased” judiciary. It demanded that an investigative commission comprising citizens of “good reputation” should be formed to probe the alleged audiotape.

SHCBA President Salahuddin Ahmed’s lawyer appeared before the court. He said that he was already informed of the attorney general’s unavailability.

The lawyer added that there was no objection to the attorney general’s request for adjournment.

Later, the court approved the attorney general’s request for adjournment and adjourned the hearing of the case till January 14.