Death sentence: PHC seeks help from law officers in militants’ case
Same bench also issued notices to NAB in weapons scandal case
The bench directed applicants’ lawyers to prepare well and assist the court with relevant sections of law and apex court judgments to support their claim. PHOTO: ONLINE
PESHAWAR:
The Peshawar High Court has asked law officers, representing the federal government, for assistance over whether the record of militants who have been awarded death sentences by military courts could be shared with their counsels after they challenge the sentences.
The bench, consisting Justice Roohul Amin and Justice Muhammad Daud Khan, head a judicial review appeal on Wednesday. The appeal was filed by Mian Syed Ghani, whose son Abdul Qayyum was sentenced to death by a military court.
The bench also stayed the execution of Qayyum and ordered the federal government to produce records of the convict at the next hearing.
When the hearing commenced, the applicant’s counsel Naveed Akhtar told the court that the applicant’s son was arrested from Mardan on May 5, 2010, for his alleged involvement in a suicide attack in Waliabad, Swat.
He said the anti-terrorism court issued his arrest warrants, while his accomplice obtained bail from the same court.
Akhtar said the trial was pending before the ATC when the family came to know on July 14 that his son has been sentenced to death by a military court.
However, counsels representing applicants in similar cases demanded the bench provide records of trials of the clients. They said the concept of fair trial stipulates that applicants’ counsel should also be given copy of the record so that they could prepare their case in accordance with it.
Meanwhile, deputy attorney general (DAG) raised objections, saying these cases were of sensitive nature and their record could only be provided to judges.
He said the petitioners’ counsels were not entitled to receive the record.
The bench directed applicants’ lawyers to prepare well and assist the court with relevant sections of law and apex court judgments to support their claim.
The DAG said as the cases were of sensitive nature; therefore they should be declared as in-camera proceeding. The defence counsels objected the idea of in-camera proceedings, while the bench remarked, “How open court proceedings could be declared in-camera?”
The bench also extended a stay order restraining authorities from executing three militants – Muhammad Tayyab, Azizur Rahman and Muhammad Ayaz.
They were charged with having affiliation with banned militant outfit and involved in target killing, attacks on security forces and acts of terrorism.
Weapon scandal case
The same bench, while hearing weapon scandal case against former inspector general of police and other senior police officers, issued notices to National Accountability Bureau director general and sought his comments on bail application filed by the former IGP.
Former IGP Malik Naveed’s counsels Abdul Sattar and Wajid Sattar Khan told the court that petitioner was in jail for the last two years.
They said he was arrested for his alleged involvement in embezzling funds and violating rules and regulations to purchase weapons for K-P police. They added that Naveed was arrested on November 2013, while reference was filed on March 12, 2014 and so far around 23 witnesses have recorded their statements.
He said the accountability court has exempted six serving police officers from any responsibility though they were also nominated in the reference and did not frame charges against them.
Sartaj added, “If [the six police officers] could not be charged, then Naveed’s role was just limited to a signature as he just approved weapons and other equipment for the police department.”
After hearing arguments, the bench adjourned the case till the next hearing by ordering NAB prosecutor to file reply within seven days.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 27th, 2016.
The Peshawar High Court has asked law officers, representing the federal government, for assistance over whether the record of militants who have been awarded death sentences by military courts could be shared with their counsels after they challenge the sentences.
The bench, consisting Justice Roohul Amin and Justice Muhammad Daud Khan, head a judicial review appeal on Wednesday. The appeal was filed by Mian Syed Ghani, whose son Abdul Qayyum was sentenced to death by a military court.
The bench also stayed the execution of Qayyum and ordered the federal government to produce records of the convict at the next hearing.
When the hearing commenced, the applicant’s counsel Naveed Akhtar told the court that the applicant’s son was arrested from Mardan on May 5, 2010, for his alleged involvement in a suicide attack in Waliabad, Swat.
He said the anti-terrorism court issued his arrest warrants, while his accomplice obtained bail from the same court.
Akhtar said the trial was pending before the ATC when the family came to know on July 14 that his son has been sentenced to death by a military court.
However, counsels representing applicants in similar cases demanded the bench provide records of trials of the clients. They said the concept of fair trial stipulates that applicants’ counsel should also be given copy of the record so that they could prepare their case in accordance with it.
Meanwhile, deputy attorney general (DAG) raised objections, saying these cases were of sensitive nature and their record could only be provided to judges.
He said the petitioners’ counsels were not entitled to receive the record.
The bench directed applicants’ lawyers to prepare well and assist the court with relevant sections of law and apex court judgments to support their claim.
The DAG said as the cases were of sensitive nature; therefore they should be declared as in-camera proceeding. The defence counsels objected the idea of in-camera proceedings, while the bench remarked, “How open court proceedings could be declared in-camera?”
The bench also extended a stay order restraining authorities from executing three militants – Muhammad Tayyab, Azizur Rahman and Muhammad Ayaz.
They were charged with having affiliation with banned militant outfit and involved in target killing, attacks on security forces and acts of terrorism.
Weapon scandal case
The same bench, while hearing weapon scandal case against former inspector general of police and other senior police officers, issued notices to National Accountability Bureau director general and sought his comments on bail application filed by the former IGP.
Former IGP Malik Naveed’s counsels Abdul Sattar and Wajid Sattar Khan told the court that petitioner was in jail for the last two years.
They said he was arrested for his alleged involvement in embezzling funds and violating rules and regulations to purchase weapons for K-P police. They added that Naveed was arrested on November 2013, while reference was filed on March 12, 2014 and so far around 23 witnesses have recorded their statements.
He said the accountability court has exempted six serving police officers from any responsibility though they were also nominated in the reference and did not frame charges against them.
Sartaj added, “If [the six police officers] could not be charged, then Naveed’s role was just limited to a signature as he just approved weapons and other equipment for the police department.”
After hearing arguments, the bench adjourned the case till the next hearing by ordering NAB prosecutor to file reply within seven days.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 27th, 2016.