The rulings of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) regarding the audio leaks about Bushra Bibi, the wife of former Pakistani premier Imran Khan, and Najam Saqib, the son of former top justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar, were postponed by the Supreme Court on Monday.
In a hearing held today, the top court declared that the orders it issued on May 29 and June 25 were outside of its jurisdiction and prohibited the IHC from taking any further action in the audio leaks case. The bench was made up of Justices Aminuddin Khan and Naeem Akhtar Afghan. Telecom providers were prohibited by IHC Judge Babar Sattar on May 29 from recording calls and data for surveillance purposes.
The court had directed that until the next hearing date, police authorities and intelligence agencies (such as the ISI and IB) would not surveil any citizens unless required by the Fair Trial Act and warrants duly issued by a high court judge. Additionally, neither PTA nor telecom companies shall permit the use of their services nor equipment for any purpose other than surveillance or the interception of data or phone calls.
Since the court barred cellular firms from sharing citizens’ data with agencies, the decision essentially hindered intelligence and law enforcement agencies (LEAs) in their investigations of crimes and terrorist monitoring. The Islamabad police had asked the IHC to permit them to use the surveillance of the suspect.
In a later ruling, the IHC restrained telecom providers from assisting LEAs with surveillance by permitting cellular firms to share with police data about suspects for post-crime inquiry. The ruling further mentioned that, at the behest of the PTA, telecom companies operating in Pakistan were using a mass surveillance system that, in the absence of any legal or regulatory safeguards, “enables interception of data and records of telecom customers.”
Earlier, Justice Sattar had denied several requests for his recusal from the case from various agencies. The Supreme Court decided today that the IHC’s rulings from May 29 and June 25 were outside of its jurisdiction and that the court was “not authorized to take suo moto notices.” At the federal government’s request, the Supreme Court also requested documents related to the audio leak case and served notices to Bushra Bibi and Najam Saqib.
When Justice Khan questioned Additional Attorney General (AAG) Munawar Iqbal Duggal about whether the IHC had identified the person capturing the audio, the AAG responded negatively and stated that the inquiry was still in progress. Justice Afghan bemoaned, “Unfortunately, no one wants to get to the truth in this country.” He mentioned that an inquiry commission had been established to look into the authenticity of audio leaks, but the SC was forced to postpone its conclusion due to directives from the outgoing chief justice.
Judge Afghan stated, “A new date has not been set in the SC for the audio leaks case as of yet.” Justice Afghan claimed that “Parliament was also blocked when it tried to find out the truth.” How will the truth be revealed if neither the court nor Parliament are permitted to operate? With the ability to capture audio on almost every mobile phone these days, Justice Khan questioned if it had been thought through that the people being spoken to were the ones releasing the audio records.
