The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday allowed the Additional Attorney General (AAG) Aamir Rehman more time to seek government directives regarding the audio leaks case. On Nov 22, the Constitutional Bench of the SC ordered the government to state whether it intends to continue with the inquiry commission constituted in the wake of audio leaks. On August 19, the SC suspended the IHC’s orders in the audio leaks case. Also in August, the top court had observed that a hearing of the three-man inquiry commission formed to probe the veracity of audio leaks was never fixed after its last hearing on May 27, 2023. Monday’s hearing was taken up by all members of the Constitutional Bench except Justice Ayesha Malik. At the outset of the hearing, the federal government sought more time in the audio leaks case, with AAG Rehman requesting the court to provide a short date for the hearing. “The question is, does the government want an inquiry into the audios or not?” the AAG asked. “This matter was to be presented in the cabinet, but it could not due to the law and order situation in Islamabad,” he went on to say, referring to last week’s clashes between security forces and PTI protesters across the federal capital. “Give time, the audio leaks matter will be presented at the next cabinet meeting,” Rehman said. “The court will be informed of the cabinet’s decision on the audio leaks.” PTI lawyer Babar Awan noted that the SC’s decision regarding the legal status of the audio leaks was available. “Let the Attorney General’s office take instructions from the government,” Justice Aminuddin Khan said. “The matter will be looked into after the government’s instructions [to the AAG].” On May 29, IHC’s Justice Babar Sattar had barred telecom companies from recording phone calls and data for surveillance purposes. The court had issued the direction: “Till the next date of hearing the intelligence agencies, including, inter alia, the ISI and IB, and police authorities will not surveil any citizens, except in accordance with requirements of the Fair Trial Act and warrants duly issued by a judge of the high court, and neither PTA nor the telecom companies shall authorise the use of their services or equipment for purposes of any surveillance or interception of phone calls or data.” The order had virtually handicapped the intelligence and law enforcement agencies (LEAs) in probing crimes and terrorist monitoring as the court stopped cellular companies from sharing citizens’ data with agencies. On June 25, the IHC had reserved its verdict on the Islamabad police’s request to allow surveillance of suspects. In a subsequent verdict, the IHC had allowed cellular companies to share with police data related to suspects for investigation in the post-crime scenario, restraining telecom operators from facilitating LEAs with surveillance. The verdict also noted that telecom companies operating in Pakistan were running a mass surveillance system that “enables interception of data and records of telecom customers” without any regulatory mechanism or legal procedures, on the PTA’s orders. Justice Sattar had earlier dismissed multiple petitions from different authorities requesting that he recuse himself from the case.