NCCIA opposes SC hearing directive

The National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) has challenged a Supreme Court order directing the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to decide applications filed by Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, seeking suspension of their sentences within a stipulated timeframe.

A three-judge bench of the SC, led by Justice Shahid Waheed, had on May 12 directed the IHC to decide the applications “preferably within two weeks” while hearing petitions filed by the couple. The matter remains pending before the apex court.

In a concise statement submitted in the same case, the NCCIA argued that the SC has a consistent and long-standing practice of not intervening in pending matters at the initial or interlocutory stage before high courts, except in extraordinary or highly exceptional circumstances.

It maintained that the petitioner had approached the court primarily on the grievance that her applications for early hearing had not been fixed or heard.

“It is normally observed that superior courts avoid intervening unless there is a situation where grave illegality is committed or to foster justice or the matter is of urgent nature. Every court has its own mechanism for dispensation of justice and also has independent system to entertain and fix the cases according to the ‘urgency’ pointed out by the applicant and in the instant matter that is conspicuously missing except that she is member of the bar,” the statement states.

The NCCIA further stated that Imaan Mazari had filed petitions against the chief justice of the IHC, alleging harassment, and that her mother, after the hearing, had claimed that the SC’s May 12 direction amounted to an acknowledgement of “many problems” in the high court and alleged “bias” against her daughter.

“Her statement is clearly creating doubts on independence of judiciary by adopting the same attitude maintained by the petitioner during the whole legal proceeding before the learned courts.”