ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar on Thursday observed that law and the constitution were under fire from outside the court through baseless criticism, however the court was showing extreme restraint which should be appreciated. The CJP heads a three-member Supreme Court bench that also includes Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Faisal Arab, which is hearing a petition filed by PML-N MNA Hanif Abbassi. The petitioner has sought disqualification of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan and Secretary General Jahangir Tareen over alleged non-disclosure of their assets, ownership of offshore companies and PTI being a foreign-aided party. “Is it appreciable whatever is being said about us outside the court? Extreme restraint is being shown despite hearing all that, which must be appreciated,” he said. “Could it be called patriotism?” he asked, adding, “We will continue to dispense justice as per law and constitution without caring for all sorts of criticism.” He observed that the criticism would not affect their stature nor will it compel the judges to be ‘dishonest’ with their work. “What could be a higher position than the one we are holding now? Why would we be unfair in our work?” he asked. Soon after resuming the hearing on Thursday, the court dismissed a request by Akram Sheikh, senior counsel for Abbasi, who pleaded the court to summon the record of nomination papers of Imran Khan which he had submitted before the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for the general elections of 1997. He said many facts would become clear from those nomination papers. The chief justice observed that Imran Khan did not win that election, thus summoning of that record was a futile exercise, adding the court did not want to prolong the case. Babar Awan, counsel for Imran Khan, however stated that if his client would have furnished wrong details in his nomination papers for 1997 election, the returning officer would have rejected his nomination papers. Justice Umar Ata Bandial noted that the case had taken a new turn as it was being heard under Article 184 (3) of the constitution, adding that the burden of undeniable evidence had come on the petitioner. Assisting the court, Attorney General for Pakistan Ashtar Ausaf submitted that two sections of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) Act were challenged by Tareen in the instant case by filing additional documents. He said Tareen had earned over Rs 70 million by insider trading and confessed that he earned this money through illegal manner. He stated that Tareen had already replied to the show-cause notice issued to him by the SECP, besides he had already paid the fine imposed on him in 2008 for insider trading. He said the fine was also deposited in the national exchequer, thus there was no point of objection to the law after 10 years. He said the law was accepted at that time, however, even then if anyone had the objection on that law, he could challenge it before the court by submitting a separate application. To a court query, he said the law could not be challenged in the hearing of the instant case. He said Tareen has termed the law in violation of the constitution in his additional documents, as his original plea did not mention any thing about the law. The chief justice then observed that Tareen had already served his punishment according to the law. Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, counsel for Tareen, contended that the court could examine any law any time in any case of public interest. The chief justice then directed him to submit his submissions in the written form. He also directed the counsel to submit a reply to the points raised by the attorney general with regard to the SECP law. Imran’s counsel, Naeem Bukhari, submitted that the nomination papers of his client were not rejected even in 2002. He said no objections were raised on his nomination papers, adding that if his client would have concealed his assets at that time, objections would have been raised over those. Published in Daily Times, November 10th 2017.