LAHORE: The Lahore Excessive Court docket on Monday postponed contempt of courtroom proceedings towards former inside minister Ahsan Iqbal until September 5.
A 3-member bench led by Justice Mazahir Ali Akbar Naqvi was listening to a petition right now filed towards Iqbal, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and 16 different leaders of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) for making anti-judiciary speeches.
Iqbal’s lawyer knowledgeable the courtroom that his consumer had submitted an unconditional apology in relation to the contempt of courtroom proceedings towards him.
To this, the bench questioned whether or not the previous inside minister had accepted his mistake. You’ve praised your self [more than apologise] in your response, the bench stated to Iqbal.
Outdoors of the courtroom, you give statements that your celebration is being targetted. On the one hand you say you received’t make such statements, however outdoors you give out the identical statements, the bench remarked.
“If the decision is in your favour then the judiciary is true, in any other case it’s incorrect. You inform us, which different celebration moreover yours has commented on the judiciary?” noticed Justice Atir Mahmood of the LHC.
The courtroom then remarked that former prime minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi had appeared throughout the earlier listening to, and the decision was made on benefit.
Iqbal’s counsel pleaded that the contempt of courtroom proceedings towards his consumer be ended, since his consumer had apologised unconditionally.
The courtroom then postponed the proceedings till after elections, until September 5.
The petition, filed towards Ahsan Iqbal and different PML-N leaders, states that Iqbal and Nawaz used derogatory language towards the Supreme Court docket judges on April 25 and 23, respectively, and the identical was aired by TV channels.
The petitioner has contended that the respondents’ motion was barred below Article 68 of the Structure however the Pakistan Digital Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) didn’t take any motion regardless of being empowered by the PEMRA Ordinance.
The petitioner has additional acknowledged that the authority didn’t implement provisions of PEMRA Ordinance and the courtroom orders of April 16, due to this fact, contempt proceedings needs to be initiated towards the respondents.