ISLAMABAD, March 11: No-one had ever imagined that an unexplained withdrawal of a review petition on the Rental Power Projects (RPP) scam would pose a challenge later in the Supreme Court’s acceding to the prime minister’s request for the transfer of the probe to a commission from the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).

“Why should the court hear the matter when the March 30, 2012 verdict has attained finality to the extent of Raja Parvez Ashraf after the withdrawal of the review petition,” observed Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry while heading a three-judge bench.

The court had taken up a letter of the prime minister to the chief justice requesting transfer of the investigation into the Rs22 billion scam from NAB to a commission headed by Federal Tax Ombudsman Dr Shoaib Suddle.

On Jan 21, the prime minister had withdrawn his review petition against the overarching judgment on the RPP scam because of the apprehension that adverse observations or an explicit order could compromise his situation.

On Monday, Waseem Sajjad advocate, representing the premier, told the court that the press and the people had shown mistrust on NAB investigations and expressed apprehension that the prime minister would influence the probe -- “an allegation that may adversely affect him when he will go to his electorate in coming elections”.

Therefore, Mr Sajjad insisted, it was necessary to transfer the investigation from NAB to a one-man commission under Dr Suddle.

However, the bench refused to buy the argument and its member Azmat Saeed quipped: “If it concerns with image building then the prime minister should go to the Saatchi and Saatchi, a global advertising agency”.

At the outset of the proceedings, Justice Gulzar Ahmed, another member of the bench, asked why the prime minister had doubts about NAB which was government’s own organisation.

What message the prime minister was giving by saying that he did not trust the bureau, the chief justice asked. “Under which law the court should accept the request of the prime minister when he has withdrawn his review petition?”

The pending review petitions had been moved by a number of persons and it concerned all of them, the chief justice said, adding that the prime minister was not the only affected person in the case.