Low Graphics Site
White bar
.: Latest News :. .: News in Pictures :.
Dawn e-paper
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Weather


FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story

August 13, 2006 Sunday Rajab 17, 1427

Click to learn more...
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
.




Opposition senators criticise PM’s adviser



By Our Staff Reporter


ISLAMABAD, Aug 12: The reported charging of huge fees by Senior Adviser to Prime Minister Sharifuddin Pirzada for defending the government in courts echoed in Senate on Saturday, with opposition members terming it ‘unacceptable, both professionally and morally’, and the government defending it as ‘legal’.

There were reports in the press that four top government counsels namely Sharifuddin Pirzada, Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Khalid Anwar and Wasim Sajjad charged the government Rs10 million (approximately) in Pakistan Steel Mills case, which did not settle in government’s favour.

According to opposition members, since Mr Pirzada holds the office equivalent to that of a federal minister, he should not have charged the government such a huge amount as court fees.

On a point of order, opposition leader Mian Raza Rabbani said since Mr Pirzada was enjoying the perks and privileges as prime minister’s adviser, he was morally bound to appear in court on behalf of the government without charging any fees.

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Dr Sher Afgan Niazi said if Mr Pirzada was not receiving any salary and allowances from the government, he had all the legal and moral right to charge the government for defending it in courts.

Having no specific agenda, Saturday’s session of Senate was only meant to complete the required working days in a calendar year.

An adjournment motion by the opposition regarding the Sindh government ban on teachers unions couldn’t come for debate.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2006