The Supreme Court has resumed hearing on the contempt of court case against Senator Faisal Vawda and MQM-P leader Mustafa Kamal for their verbal onslaught against judges of superior courts.
A three-judge bench of Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa, Justice Irfan Saadat and Justice Naeem Afghan is presiding over the hearing.
The court has summoned both Vawda and Kamal for today’s hearing.
During the previous hearing on May 18, the apex court dismissed Mustafa Kamal’s request for immediate pardon.
On Wednesday, Vawda also tendered an unqualified apology, appealing to the court for withdrawal of the notice against him.
The court took suo motu after Vawda’s press conference on May 15, where he indirectly implied that high court judges had vilified the country’s intelligence agencies.
The court initiated suo motu proceedings against Vawda and Kamal on May 18, with CJP Isa directing both to file their responses to the show-cause notices within two weeks.
Also, the PEMRA (Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority) was ordered to submit the video recording and transcript of Vawda’s press conference at the National Press Club in Islamabad.
Vawda stated that the high court judges must either provide evidence to support their accusations or refrain from vilifying state institutions.
The senator raised questions about assertions made by Islamabad High Court judge Babar Sattar, adding, “Merely making accusations isn’t enough; evidence must be presented in court.”
The senator assured that he would stand by the judges if evidence is presented, underlining the importance of exposing those meddling in judicial matters.
Vawda highlighted the sacrifices made by soldiers and policemen alike, questioning if the constitution mandates laying down of lives by them [police and military] alone.
He deplored that the way intelligence agencies were repeatedly mentioned, it seemed as if a state institution was being mocked.
Vawda also berated politicians, suspecting their involvement.
The former minister urged Justice Babar Sattar to provide proof of the alleged interference. He also called upon the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) to intervene in the issue.