ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) was told on Thursday that the National Accountability Bureau (Amendment) Ordinance, 2024, was enacted to keep the jailed former prime minister Imran Khan on extended remand. A single-judge bench, led by Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas, heard a petition filed by citizen Malik NajiUllah challenging the amendments to the law governing the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), which were made through a presidential ordinance. During the hearing, Advocate Azhar Siddique, representing the petitioner, argued that increasing the duration of physical remand from 14 to 40 days under the NAB Ordinance amendment is not only unconstitutional but also a clear example of mala fide legislation. He claimed the amendment was designed specifically to keep Imran Khan on extended remand, noting that since the ordinance’s enforcement, no other individual has been held under the extended remand. He described the legislation as personal and discriminatory. Siddique asked the court to declare the ordinance null and void to prevent such targeted and malicious legislation in the future. The NAB prosecutor, however, objected, arguing that the petition was no longer valid because the ordinance had expired. Siddique countered that the expiration of the ordinance does not erase its unconstitutional nature, insisting it was invalid from the outset and should never have been promulgated. After hearing the arguments, the court adjourned the case until April 8 for further proceedings. According to the petitioner’s lawyer, Sections 24 and 36 of the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999, were amended to increase the duration of physical remand for NAB suspects from 14 days to 40 days, while reducing the penalty for framing a false case from five to two years. The lawyer argued that the amendments were issued through an ordinance by an acting president, who, he contended, cannot issue an ordinance under Article 89 of the Constitution. He further claimed the extension of the remand period was motivated by political revenge. The petition, filed by Malik NajiUllah through his counsel, named the Cabinet Secretary, the President, the Senate Chairman, and the National Assembly Speaker as respondents. It contended that the ordinance unlawfully extended remand periods, reduced penalties for filing malicious cases, infringed on basic human rights, and undermined democratic principles. NajiUllah argued that the ordinance, issued without parliamentary approval, imposed the opinion of a single individual on the entire nation. He also criticised the ordinance for failing to adequately address the issue of officers making false cases, arguing that a two-year penalty was insufficient. The petitioner highlighted that the Chief Justice of Pakistan had previously questioned the democratic legitimacy of such ordinances, noting that they should not bypass parliamentary scrutiny. He requested the court to declare the National Accountability Ordinance, 2024, unconstitutional and void. Copyright Business Recorder, 2026