Right of vote to overseas Pakistanis SC issues notices to ECP, NADRA.

ISLAMABAD -- The Supreme Court of Pakistan Wednesday continued its hearing in the petition of Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan against the amendments in the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999. A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial, and comprising Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah conducted hearing of former prime minister Imran Khan's petition against the amendments in the NAO, 1999.The chief justice said after the amendments in NAO the trial on references were stalled or returned. During the hearing, Makhdoom Ali Khan argued that it is an issue and asked the bench to direct NAB to inform the court that out of 386 how many were of parliamentarians. He further contended that the NAB is also directed to provide details of references returned and how many persons were acquitted or how many applications were filed for the acquittal after the enactment of five ordinances promulgated the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government to amend the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO). He said that the NAO second amendment bill laid before the National Assembly was the combination of the previous government changes made in the NAO through ordinances. It was the continuation of the previous government's ordinances. The counsel argued that many references were returned because in those cases the offences were related to the FBR, therefore they were sent to the tax department. He said that NAB should also provide a list that how many applications were filed for the acquittal after the enactment of ordinances during the PTI tenure. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah noted that there are layers of laws for various offences in the country therefore a person once out from the NAB ambit does not mean will go scot free or he can't be tried by other courts under different offences. Makhdoom said in his opinion the accountability courts should not have returned the references, as it has the power to acquit or punish persons instead of returning the references. He said there is no acquittal but their cases may be sent to other courts, if there is no power with the accountability courts. Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan remarked that the other side (petitioner) case is when the definition of the offences have been changed, and the standard of proof changed then there is no conviction. He questioned how the government could redefine the offence and reset the standard of...