In response to the National Accountability Bureau’s (NAB) summon to former first lady Bushra Bibi’s close friend Farah Khan, advocate Azhar Siddique requested the anti-graft watchdog to quash the call-up notices, stating that NAB had failed to establish its jurisdiction. In a reply to the bureau’s director general, additional director and deputy director, the counsellor stated that the call-up notices must be cancelled in light of “facts, peculiar circumstances and judgments passed by the superior courts of Pakistan.” Advocate Siddique stated that the call up notices were issued to some of his clients through the media, deeming the practice “odd”. He argued that this “in turn means that, technically, a notice of only one or two days, has been given by your office,” accusing the NAB of ill intention, mala fide and a concocted agenda leading towards political victimisation. He furthered that appropriate jurisdiction had not been established in the assests beyond means case against Farah Khan as her husband Ahsan Iqbal Jamil and Chaudhry Majeed, along with 19 others, were summoned. The counsellor stated that Farah was a private citizen and had never held office, as those who were summoned were employees at Ghousia Builders Private Limited. “The aforementioned entity is a private company, therefore, the same has no relation with any public office holder or public entity, whatsoever. It is imperative to mention herein that in order to make out the case, we hereby state that the jurisdiction of NAB, as stipulated under NAO [National Accountability Ordinance], is strictly limited to the extent of private persons including our clients as they are private persons, hence, NAB lacks jurisdiction to issue any call-up notice to the same in any manner, whatsoever,” read the statement. The advocate further criticised the anti-graft watchdog, accusing them of pursuing a case based on “assumption, concocted conclusion without any basis or solid foundations.” Siddique claimed that the notices issued were a “deliberate attempt to undermine and circumvent the authority and jurisdiction provided to the relevant institutions.” Farah Khan’s lawyer lambasted NAB, claiming the that such notices were neither permissible under NAO nor the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 and “violate the fundamental principles of law that the executive action cannot undo the legal authority provided under the legislature instruments.”