Constitution allows PM to appoint his advisor: Justice Minallah

ISLAMABAD: Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Athar Minallah, while hearing a case pertaining to the appointment of premier’s aide Mirza Shahzad Akbar, has remarked that the prime minister can appoint anyone as an adviser as per the Constitution.

Chief Justice Athar Minallah presided the hearing of a petition against the appointment of Advisor to the Prime Minister on Accountability Mirza Shahzad Akbar on Tuesday.

Earlier, the petitioner, Advocate Pervez Zahoor urged the court to declare Akbar’s appointment null and void and argued that Supreme Court judge Justice Qazi Faez Isa had also questioned the aide’s credentials and his appointment as SAPM on accountability.

Advocate Pervez Zahoor further alleged that Akbar was “using political influence”.

During the proceedings, Justice Minallah said,  “If the prime minister did not appoint a qualified person as his adviser, it is his prerogative.”

While in his arguments, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the appointment of unelected members was against the National Assembly’s rules, at which Justice Minallah said: “Constitutionally, the prime minister can appoint anyone as an adviser.”

“Shahzad Akbar is part of the federal cabinet,” Kinrani said. Athar Minallah said that the IHC, in its ruling in a case pertaining to the sugar scam, had said that Akbar “cannot be a part of the federal cabinet”.

The petitioner’s lawyer told the court that during yesterday’s sitting of the lower house, Akbar had answered questions even though federal ministers were present, adding that as per rules of business, accountability is an independent institution.

justice Athar Minallah inquired “What has happened now to cause fear that he (Akbar) is interfering in NAB?”

The petitioner said that those anti-corruption laws have been separated from the accountability institution, at which Justice Minallah said: “Merely naming something does not prove interference.”

“Did he (Akbar) interfere in the matters of NAB chairman? Did he interfere in FIA? You have not presented any such thing to us.” Justice Minallah noted that the prime minister was answerable to the parliament, adding: “We should strengthen the parliament.”

The IHC chief further said that if the matter was related to rule of law, the petitioner should take it to the relevant bar councils.

The court made it clear that NAB is an independent body and no one can interfere with its working. After hearing the arguments of the parties, IHC reserved its verdict on the admissibility of the petition.

Earlier, while clarifying his position on his earlier clarification, Shehzad Akbar said that he did not mean to imply that the agriculture department is in no position to grant relief.

“I appear to have offended the hardworking people over at the agriculture department, who have taken my first clarification as a slight towards their abilities and competence,” he said.

Akbar is also nominated in another case, in which the appointments of 15 SAPMs have been challenged. The case is being heard by a separate bench of the IHC.