LeGenD
MODERATOR
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2006
- Messages
- 15,813
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
Refer to article above. Try to connect the dots which are not being connected on purpose.
“The wife of Justice Qazi Faez Isa on Thursday showed to the apex court the documents and explained the sources through which properties in the United Kingdom were purchased. She, however, requested the judges not to share documents with the government.”
“For almost a one-hour narration, through a video-link, about her properties, and the sources through which these London properties were purchased, she seemed to be crying on many occasions.”
So to clarify from article above- she shared so called originals through video link. And asked for originals even through video link to not be shared to govt. In fact, it is well known that she shared nothing of the original documents with FBR. Another words, she didn’t share documents. What we have here in article is her flashing alleged documents in video link. Means nothing in court of law.
The SC even said that we have no competence to hear this evidence. Please present these documents to FBR or SJC which she did not do. But somehow this presentation of documents over video is being presented as if she has proven money trail by disingenuous media sources. It’s eye wash nothing else.
So you read one link and ignore other to issue premature judgement calls?
The request was granted. Thereafter, in her video link statement on June 18, 2020 (a transcript of which is available with the order sheet), Mrs. Isa expressly asked why she had not been questioned by the tax authorities when the reference alleged her London properties to be shrouded in controversy. The assertion that she could fully explain the source of funding of the properties was implicit in her statement. Equally her stand acknowledged an obligation to justify the same. She also referred to her sources of income that apparently financed the purchase of the London properties. This indicated that she was prepared for and inclined to answer questions about the London properties.
Therefore, in issuing the direction to the FBR to commence proceedings in respect of the London properties, the Court was moved by two factors: firstly, that Mrs. Isa be given an opportunity to explain the source of funding of the London properties so that any stigma surrounding them is erased from the person of the learned petitioner and the Court; and secondly, to redress Mrs. Isa’s complaint as expressed in her video link statement of June 18, 2020, made before the Court that she should have, but had not, been asked about the properties from the beginning:
“Judge: ...We understand and we can notice and realize you have a great deal of record showing accrual of income and transfer from your own account to your foreign account and then the purchase of foreign property...We have a little problem; we cannot look at the merits of the case. There are two forums available. Your Hon’ble husband has in his pleadings indicated that this is a matter which should go to the tax authorities but it is a matter concerning your interest and your records; that is one option; and this is something we told the parties two days ago. The second thing is that another forum which is competent to hear you; and I assure you, you will be given a most sympathetic hearing, each and every document you say, will be considered, preserved... And that is the Supreme Judicial Council; you can make the statement there...
Mrs. Isa: Why has no one asked me this from the beginning? Why has the FBR not contacted me: I have waited and waited; 13 months of hell they have put us through; my family and I... I have requested as my husband has, please ask us from the beginning[.] Why after 13 months are you then saying then there are these two forum? Why were we not asked at the beginning...
Judge: We understand what you are saying but even this plea is on the merits. We cannot consider it... but now we will make sure that they will attend to you, they will not be derisory as your husband complained yesterday; they will respect you; they will consider all the documents you have and all this issue of limitation etc. that is something which has to be dealt with in accordance with law...
Detailed reasons of four judges who rejected review petition of Justice Isa
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court Friday held that Justice Qazi Faez Isa was holding the public office of Chief Justice of the Balochistan High Court in 2013, when his spouse and children purchased three...
www.thenews.com.pk
Your lack of knowledge of the proceedings for this case is duly noted.
Now what do you want me to do? To conduct a retrial of the case for your benefit? Why don't you go to the concerned to find out?
I will not continue this debate further with you because you have made up your mind and have unnecessarily dragged this conversation to nowhere. Your access to this thread is restricted. Sorry.
- - - - - UPDATE - - - - -
Khan accepted misjudgment because while Faeiz isa has not accounted for his wealth or assetts, Khan was goaded into going after Faeiz Isa by establishment because of his ruling of Faizabad case.
True and perfectly corrupt people can be made SC judges and PMs. It’s why we are a banana republic.
I noticed a typing error in a previous post and fixed it in fairness:
But the essence of my contention remains the same.
Pakistani Judge Under Fire After Implicating Military In Anti-Gov’t Protest
A senior judge in Pakistan’s top court is facing possible legal action over alleged misconduct months after delivering a landmark ruling that criticized the role of the country’s powerful military in an anti-government protest in 2017.
gandhara.rferl.org
Who is Justice Qazi Faez Isa?
A look at the life and work of one of Pakistan's most cited judges, named in a reference before the SJC.
www.dawn.com
SC issues detailed verdict in Justice Faez Isa case
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court declared that no one is above the law, and no one can be denied his right to be dealt...
www.brecorder.com
When a judge reminded ALL institutions to operate within their legal mandate, it was decided to investigate him on the account of corruption at this point? Wonderful. This was a politically motivated case as pointed out before. The Supreme Court could see the obvious. Banana republic stuff for sure.
I stand by my decision to stop this debate in this thread. This is to your benefit as well.
Last edited: