ISLAMABAD: Despite objection from the principal law officer, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday decided to proceed in the audio leak case and also extended the stay till August 16 against summoning of a son of former chief justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar by a parliamentary committee.

In response to the order issued by IHC Justice Babar Sattar, the attorney general as well as two amici Sardar Latif Khan Khosa and Aitzaz Ahsan appeared before the court.

The others, including Mian Raza Rabbani, Mohsin Nawaz Ranjha and Makhdoom Ali Khan, were not in attendance when the hearing on the petition of Najamus Saqib resumed on Monday.

On May 31, Justice Sattar had framed questions from the amici as well as the federal government regarding the audio leaks.

The court questioned as if a legal framework existed for “recording of telephone conversations between citizens, and in the event that the answer is yes, the report will detail the regulatory and oversight framework to provide for recording of phone calls or exchange of data/messages between citizens through any telecommunication means.”

The court also asked them to identify the legal mechanism for grant of permission authorising recording of telephone conversations between citizens and the safeguards adopted to ensure that if any phone call was permitted by law to be recorded, its confidentiality is preserved and the recording is not leaked or used for extraneous purposes.

Justice Sattar also sought information about measures to investigate who had undertaken or was undertaking audio recording of conversations of citizens and how such conversations were being released to the public.

Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan pointed out that since the Supreme Court was also hearing an identical matter, the IHC should not commence the proceeding.

He argued that some of the questions may come into consideration in a matter pending before the Supreme Court in which the formation of a commission headed by Justice Qazi Faez Isa to inquire into audio leaks had been challenged.

Justice Sattar noted that “no order or record has been produced before this Court establishing that the questions farmed by this Court in its order dated 31.05.2023 are pending adjudication before the Supreme Court.”

“To the extent that the Supreme Court frames any such question in any matter pending before it and rules on it, the judgment would be binding on this Court. To the extent that it does not do so till the time that the instant matter is adjudicated by this Court, the judgment of this Court may be of assistance to the Supreme Court,” he observed.

Published in Dawn, June 20th, 2023