IHC reserves verdict on federal appeal over trade officers’ appointments

ISLAMABAD – The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Monday reserved its verdict on a federal government intra-court appeal challenging a single-bench order concerning the status of intelligence agency reports in the appointment of Trade and Investment Officers at various Pakistani embassies abroad.

A division bench of IHC comprising Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro and Justice Umair Majid Malik conducted hearing of the federal government’s intra-court appeal against a single-bench judgment in favour of officials who had challenged their rejection on security clearance grounds. During the hearing, Advocate Kashif Malik, counsel for a successful candidate, argued that no allegation had been levelled against his client, adding that it appeared the posting was being blocked to favour someone else. He contended that the Intelligence Bureau should work within its mandate rather than influence transparent appointments.

AI deception, fake identities at heart of student death probe

Additional Attorney General Rashid Hafeez defended the government’s position, stating that if an official were declared medically unfit, their posting would also be cancelled. He explained that the role of a Trade and Investment Officer is to bring investment to Pakistan, and the Establishment Division makes every appointment subject to intelligence agency reports. The court, after hearing the arguments, reserved its verdict in the case. On the previous hearing, Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro had questioned whether intelligence reports could be examined in a judicial order. The Additional Attorney General submitted that such appointments were at the discretion of the Prime Minister and the government.

IHC seeks replies over planned Islamabad cricket stadium

Justice Soomro also questioned whether the court could not intervene where the constitutional distribution of powers was concerned. He also asked whether an officer who was not cleared for posting abroad could be considered fit to serve in Pakistan. Additional Attorney General Rashid Hafeez argued that security clearance was mandatory for government officials being posted abroad. He said the officials were currently serving in Pakistan, but their posting abroad involved a security clearance issue. He submitted that if an official committed an act within Pakistan, it would have an individual impact, whereas any act committed abroad could have implications for the entire country. He maintained that the petitions filed by the officials were not maintainable before the High Court.

CDA extends Capital House bidding deadline by 15 days

Representing the affected officials, Advocate Saad Butt argued that the candidates had been shortlisted after tests and interviews by a high-level Grade-22 committee. He said they were subsequently trained and even issued diplomatic passports before being rejected on the basis of intelligence reports. He said that affected officials were senior civil servants holding important positions, had good ACRs and had received awards, adding that there were no allegations, corruption cases or inquiries pending against them. The Additional Attorney General argued that service matters of the officials fell under Section 10 of the Civil Servants Act and could be taken before Service Tribunal and other relevant forums.

Karachi administration decides to launch crackdown on illegal billboards

He contended that writ petitions in such matters were not maintainable before the High Court. He reiterated that security clearance was necessary for officials being posted abroad.

NIPCO House, 4 – Shaharah e Fatima Jinnah,

Tel: +92 42 36367580 | Fax : +92 42 36367005