August 12, 2008	Tuesday	Sha'aban 9, 1429

ISLAMABAD, Aug 11: The Supreme Court has said that it is not hostile to anyone and no one should be hostile to it because “all we want is to work.”

The observation was made during the hearing of federal government’s appeals against the June 23 Lahore High Court (LHC) order disqualifying Nawaz Sharif from contesting by-elections.

A three-member bench, comprising Justice Mohammad Moosa K. Leghari, Jutice Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery and Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali, has already ordered postponement of by-election on NA-123 Lahore seat from where the PML-N chief was a candidate.

The LHC, while deciding petitions filed by Syed Khurram Ali Shah, a voter, and Noor Elahi, an independent candidate, had disallowed Nawaz Sharif from contesting the by-election but kept pending a petition against the candidature of Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif till a decision by an election tribunal about his nomination.

The petitions were filed in the high court after the Election Commission had allowed the PML-N leaders to contest the by-election on technical grounds, without deciding about the legal status of their nomination to offset a split verdict of an Election Tribunal on appeals challenging the candidature of the Sharif brothers. Justice Hafiz Tariq Nasim had allowed the Sharifs to contest the June 26 by-polls while Justice Mohammad Akram Qureshi held them ineligible.

On Monday, the apex court put off the hearing of the appeals for Wednesday when Deputy Attorney-General Raja Abdur Rehman supported a request by a lawyer for an adjournment till after the court’s summer vacation which will last till Sept 8.

Akram Sheikh, who represented Mehr Zafar Iqbal, requested the court to adjourn the matter, citing personal matters.

Although the federal government did not oppose the request for adjournment, Ahmed Raza Qasuri, representing the petitioners, opposed the move and said that the matter was of great national importance and there was no room for personal reasons.

He also opposed the petitions of Mehr Zafar Iqbal and Shakil Baiq by stating that they had come to the apex court under the impression as if they had been made party in the case when it was not the case because the high court had rejected their applications.

Akram Sheikh, however, asked the court would it like to disturb the status quo (grant a stay against the disqualification), granted by it at a time when the entire nation was bracing to impeach President Pervez Musharraf.

The court took exception to Akram Sheikh’s remarks suggesting that a bench of the apex court was waiting for petitions against the impeachment process and explained that it could adjourn the matter but not indefinitely.

“We are not hostile to anyone and no one should be hostile to us,” Justice Leghari said, adding that the judges did not want any confrontation. “All we want is to work”.

Ahmed Raza Qasuri also told the court that he had filed a contempt of court petition against the Punjab chief secretary for becoming a party in the case when an election dispute was always between two parties.

Dr Mubeenuddin Qazi, representing Noor Ellahi, questioned the validity of the federal government’s appeal and said it should have been filed by the aggrieved party.

Syed Khurram Ali Shah and Noor Elahi had requested the court to dismiss the appeal and impose cost since the federal government had not come clean and, therefore, was not a “necessary or aggrieved party”.