Malik Riaz finds a lawyer who was show caused by Supreme Court

ISLAMABAD: After a search of two weeks, Malik Riaz, the property tycoon, has been able to find a lawyer to contest his contempt of court case initiated by the Supreme Court against him, but the lawyer himself was show caused in 2010 by the apex court for professional misconduct.

Dr A Basit, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, has been engaged by Malik Riaz, but the lawyer, so far, has not been shared any documents, so he is not prepared yet.While talking to The News, Dr Basit confirmed that he has been engaged by the property tycoon in the contempt of court case but has neither been shared any evidence nor he has prepared for the case but would appear before the apex court for Malik Riaz on Thursday.

Dr Basit is known as an outspoken lawyer and has already appeared in the PCO judges’ contempt case. The counsel is also defending NRO beneficiaries such as Ahmad Riaz Sheikh and Adnan A Khawaja.

On June 21, Malik Riaz had stated in the court that he could not arrange any lawyer to represent him in the case and, therefore, requested the court to grant him 10 days to engage a lawyer. He said that due to the resolutions passed by Rawalpindi and Islamabad district bar associations, no one was willing to represent him in the case.

The lawyer, Dr Basit’s doctorate degree had been disowned by Yale Law School of United States of America, the university from where the counsel claims to have passed the degree. Not only this, Dr Basit came to the limelight when, while appearing on behalf of the federation in 18th amendment cases, first objected on the constitution of the bench hearing the cases and later started changing his stances first passing on the buck to President Asif Ali Zardari then to his Secretary General Salman Farooqi and finally settling on Babar Awan for giving instructions to him regarding the objections.

At that time he had also threatened to file a reference against the Chief Justice of Pakistan. He was issued a show-cause notice for professional misconduct by misleading the Supreme Court in 18th Amendment cases that why he should not be suspended from practice/removed from the roll of Advocates/Senior Advocates of the court.