IHC asks who taps phone calls.

ISLAMABAD -- The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has raised a number of questions with regard to surveillance of private individuals and legal status of such recordings, while hearing a petition filed by son of a former chief justice against a parliamentary committee probing his alleged audios.

'Is the parliament vested with legal authority to inquire into and investigate acts of private citizens who hold no public office or whether assuming such power intrudes into the domain of the executive?' said a written order issued by an IHC bench on Thursday.

The bench comprising Justice Babar Sattar on Wednesday took up a petition filed by Najam-us-Saqib, the son of former chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Naqib Nisar.

Najam had approached the IHC against a special committee formed by the National Assembly speaker to probe into a couple of audio clips allegedly featuring his voice.

In one of the clips, Najam could be heard telling a politician, Abuzar Chadar, that his father, Nisar, had 'worked really hard' to get Chadar a ticket of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party.

In the second audio, Najam allegedly tells one Mian Aziz how much money he expects in return for the party ticket. On May 2, the National Assembly passed a motion demanding formation of a special committee to investigate the audios and on May 3, the NA speaker formed the committee.

After its in-camera meeting, the committee chairman, Aslam Bhootani, on May 24 told the media that the panel had summoned to its next meeting former CJP Nisar, his son Najam as well as Mian Aziz and Chadar in connection with its probe into the leaked audios.

In the petition filed on May 30, Najam requested the court to suspend proceedings of the committee and stop it from taking any punitive action. And the IHC on Wednesday suspended the notice issued by the committee to Najam and others.

In a written order, the court appointed senior lawyers Aitzaz Ahsan, Makhdoom Ali Khan, Mian Raza Rabbani and Mohsin Shahnawaz Ranjha as amici to assist the court given that the subject-matter involves interpretation of the constitutional scheme of separation of powers.

It asked as to whether the Constitution and the rules framed under it to regulate parliamentary procedure vest in the office of the National Assembly speaker the authority to constitute a special committee to investigate actions of a private citizen who is not a lawmaker or a public officeholder.

'Does the Constitution or statutory law empower the...