Interior secretary summoned in Musharraf treason case
Special court will consider whether the trial can continue without recording Musharraf’s statement.
Former Pakistan president, Pervez Musharraf. PHOTO:FILE
ISLAMABAD:
The special court holding a high treason trial of former military ruler Pervez Musharraf for subverting the Constitution in November 2007 has decided to examine whether the trial can be concluded without recording Musharraf’s statement.
The three-judge bench, headed by the Lahore High Court Chief Justice Yawar Ali and comprising Sindh High Court’s Justice Nazar Akbar and Balochistan High Court’s Justice Tahira Safdar, on Monday also summoned the interior secretary on August 27 in this regard.
In April, the former Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) government submitted an application in the court, requesting it to conclude the trial without waiting for personal appearance of Musharraf, who has been living in UAE since 2016, and pronounce judgment on basis of available record.
Musharraf treason case fixed for Aug 20
The application said the high treason proceedings are covered by provision of a special law, which lays down the entire manner of regulating proceedings of those who are present and of those who choose to stay away from the court.
“The law also deals with persons having poor health and declares it not to be a valid ground for adjournment of the case. The law also mandates the special court to pass a judgment notwithstanding the presence or otherwise of the accused,” it said.
Section 9 of the Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act 1976 says no trial before the special court shall be adjourned for any purpose unless the special court is of opinion that the adjournment is necessary in the interests of justice and, in particular, no trial shall be adjourned by reason of the absence of any accused person due to illness.
Treason case: Court summons FO officials to bring Musharraf back
“The interest of justice can never be aligned with delay in trial; rather the interest of justice is served only by conclusion of the case. The language of this section is quite imperative and leaves no uncertainty about the intent of the legislature,” it said.
The prosecution said there is no need regarding the compliance of section 342 CrPC as it depends on the conduct of the accused. Musharraf has already availed full opportunity of cross-examining all the prosecution witnesses exhaustibly, it said.
Earlier, lawyer Akram Sheikh stepped down as the head of the prosecution team tasked by the previous federal government to prosecute Musharraf under Article 6 of the Constitution. During the hearing on Monday, the bench wondered why Akram Sheikh did not submit application in the court.
Akhtar Shah, counsel for Musharraf, said his client would appear if the defence ministry provided him security. The court observed that it is the government’s duty to provide security to the accused. The bench also noted that they will examine whether counsel can represent an absconder or not.
Govt yet to notify new Musharraf trial court
Treason case against Musharraf is one of the biggest challenges for the PTI-led government for a variety of reasons. A number of incumbent ministers were part of Musharraf government while the Law Minister Dr Farogh Nasim was his main counsel in the treason case.
In November of 2007, the PTI chief had pledged to initiate proceedings against Musharraf over his unconstitutional acts, but the PTI has been silent in this regard since. Interestingly, a key member of Musharraf’s party, Dr Amjad, withdrew his nomination papers in favour of Khan in last month’s polls.
This case will also serve as a test-case for the superior judiciary’s resolve to conclude the trial. It has also been witnessed that the civil-military relations were affected after initiation of the high treason proceedings against the ex-army chief by the former PML-N government in late 2013.
Recently, the apex court summoned Musharraf in a matter regarding his disqualification but he did not show up despite various guarantees offered by the Supreme Court.
The special court holding a high treason trial of former military ruler Pervez Musharraf for subverting the Constitution in November 2007 has decided to examine whether the trial can be concluded without recording Musharraf’s statement.
The three-judge bench, headed by the Lahore High Court Chief Justice Yawar Ali and comprising Sindh High Court’s Justice Nazar Akbar and Balochistan High Court’s Justice Tahira Safdar, on Monday also summoned the interior secretary on August 27 in this regard.
In April, the former Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) government submitted an application in the court, requesting it to conclude the trial without waiting for personal appearance of Musharraf, who has been living in UAE since 2016, and pronounce judgment on basis of available record.
Musharraf treason case fixed for Aug 20
The application said the high treason proceedings are covered by provision of a special law, which lays down the entire manner of regulating proceedings of those who are present and of those who choose to stay away from the court.
“The law also deals with persons having poor health and declares it not to be a valid ground for adjournment of the case. The law also mandates the special court to pass a judgment notwithstanding the presence or otherwise of the accused,” it said.
Section 9 of the Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act 1976 says no trial before the special court shall be adjourned for any purpose unless the special court is of opinion that the adjournment is necessary in the interests of justice and, in particular, no trial shall be adjourned by reason of the absence of any accused person due to illness.
Treason case: Court summons FO officials to bring Musharraf back
“The interest of justice can never be aligned with delay in trial; rather the interest of justice is served only by conclusion of the case. The language of this section is quite imperative and leaves no uncertainty about the intent of the legislature,” it said.
The prosecution said there is no need regarding the compliance of section 342 CrPC as it depends on the conduct of the accused. Musharraf has already availed full opportunity of cross-examining all the prosecution witnesses exhaustibly, it said.
Earlier, lawyer Akram Sheikh stepped down as the head of the prosecution team tasked by the previous federal government to prosecute Musharraf under Article 6 of the Constitution. During the hearing on Monday, the bench wondered why Akram Sheikh did not submit application in the court.
Akhtar Shah, counsel for Musharraf, said his client would appear if the defence ministry provided him security. The court observed that it is the government’s duty to provide security to the accused. The bench also noted that they will examine whether counsel can represent an absconder or not.
Govt yet to notify new Musharraf trial court
Treason case against Musharraf is one of the biggest challenges for the PTI-led government for a variety of reasons. A number of incumbent ministers were part of Musharraf government while the Law Minister Dr Farogh Nasim was his main counsel in the treason case.
In November of 2007, the PTI chief had pledged to initiate proceedings against Musharraf over his unconstitutional acts, but the PTI has been silent in this regard since. Interestingly, a key member of Musharraf’s party, Dr Amjad, withdrew his nomination papers in favour of Khan in last month’s polls.
This case will also serve as a test-case for the superior judiciary’s resolve to conclude the trial. It has also been witnessed that the civil-military relations were affected after initiation of the high treason proceedings against the ex-army chief by the former PML-N government in late 2013.
Recently, the apex court summoned Musharraf in a matter regarding his disqualification but he did not show up despite various guarantees offered by the Supreme Court.