SC drops NRO case against Zardari, Musharraf
Bench says apex court not to proceed further as respondents have submitted assets details
PHOTO: FILE
ISLAMABAD :
After several court hearings to get assets details of former president Asif Ali Zardari and his children, the Supreme Court on Friday dropped the proceedings against him and another former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf.
A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar disposed of a constitutional petition that sought recovery of “losses incurred to the national exchequer” after the promulgation of National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) in 2007.
The bench said that the apex court would not proceed further in the matter as the respondents had already submitted details of their assets on record. It, however, ruled that if the petitioner wanted to pursue the matter, he might approach the proper forum.
SC hints at not moving against Asif Zardari in NRO case
When informed that the petitioner could not attend the hearing, the bench noted that he [petitioner] had already submitted a concise statement and that it was a matter of public interest so the court could hear the matter in his absence.
The petition was filed by President of the Lawyers Foundation for Justice, Advocate Feroz Shah Gilani, for “recovery of losses” Pakistan suffered after the promulgation of the NRO. The bench did not pass any direction for bringing Musharraf from abroad to face trial in various cases pending at different forums.
On November 9, the bench had sought written replies from the federal government, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the petitioner, regarding maintainability of the petition.
In his petition, Gilani had requested the court to issue order for the recovery of huge amounts of public money misappropriated and wasted by the respondents through unlawful means already on record in different judgments of the Supreme Court and high court.
The petitioner contended that Musharraf subverted the Constitution by declaring emergency followed by the promulgation of the NRO, arbitrarily withdrawing criminal and corruption cases against the politicians, including Asif Zardari, which caused huge financial losses to the national exchequer.
According to the petition, since the Supreme Court in its landmark judgment of Dec 16, 2009 has declared the NRO void ab initio, the respondents are liable to compensate the losses and the damage suffered by the exchequer of debt-ridden Pakistan, including the loss of $60 million stashed in Swiss banks allegedly by Zardari.
Likewise, former attorney general Malik Qayyum wrote a letter to the attorney general for Geneva (Switzerland), withdrawing the criminal and civil proceedings against Zardari, but the Supreme Court in its 2009 judgment held that Qayyum had written the letter in his personal capacity, against the Rules of Business, 1973.
The petition alleges that the actions of Musharraf and Qayyum – promulgation of the NRO – caused huge losses amounting to billions of rupees to Pakistan. Both willfully violated the oath of office to the detriment of the country in violation of the rule of the law, particularly of Articles 2, 2A, 25, 227 of the Constitution, it added.
Interestingly, Zardari and his children had already submitted details of their assets during the past 10 years. Likewise, Musharraf and Maik Qayyum also submitted details of their assets. In his remarks during a hearing of the matter on October 11, the chief justice said: “I do not want to retire (with even a hint) that I did injustice with anyone.”
The Chief Justice asked Zardari’s attorney, Farooq H Naek, to convey to the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leader that judges had no connection with anyone and they held no bias against anyone.
After several court hearings to get assets details of former president Asif Ali Zardari and his children, the Supreme Court on Friday dropped the proceedings against him and another former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf.
A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar disposed of a constitutional petition that sought recovery of “losses incurred to the national exchequer” after the promulgation of National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) in 2007.
The bench said that the apex court would not proceed further in the matter as the respondents had already submitted details of their assets on record. It, however, ruled that if the petitioner wanted to pursue the matter, he might approach the proper forum.
SC hints at not moving against Asif Zardari in NRO case
When informed that the petitioner could not attend the hearing, the bench noted that he [petitioner] had already submitted a concise statement and that it was a matter of public interest so the court could hear the matter in his absence.
The petition was filed by President of the Lawyers Foundation for Justice, Advocate Feroz Shah Gilani, for “recovery of losses” Pakistan suffered after the promulgation of the NRO. The bench did not pass any direction for bringing Musharraf from abroad to face trial in various cases pending at different forums.
On November 9, the bench had sought written replies from the federal government, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the petitioner, regarding maintainability of the petition.
In his petition, Gilani had requested the court to issue order for the recovery of huge amounts of public money misappropriated and wasted by the respondents through unlawful means already on record in different judgments of the Supreme Court and high court.
The petitioner contended that Musharraf subverted the Constitution by declaring emergency followed by the promulgation of the NRO, arbitrarily withdrawing criminal and corruption cases against the politicians, including Asif Zardari, which caused huge financial losses to the national exchequer.
According to the petition, since the Supreme Court in its landmark judgment of Dec 16, 2009 has declared the NRO void ab initio, the respondents are liable to compensate the losses and the damage suffered by the exchequer of debt-ridden Pakistan, including the loss of $60 million stashed in Swiss banks allegedly by Zardari.
Likewise, former attorney general Malik Qayyum wrote a letter to the attorney general for Geneva (Switzerland), withdrawing the criminal and civil proceedings against Zardari, but the Supreme Court in its 2009 judgment held that Qayyum had written the letter in his personal capacity, against the Rules of Business, 1973.
The petition alleges that the actions of Musharraf and Qayyum – promulgation of the NRO – caused huge losses amounting to billions of rupees to Pakistan. Both willfully violated the oath of office to the detriment of the country in violation of the rule of the law, particularly of Articles 2, 2A, 25, 227 of the Constitution, it added.
Interestingly, Zardari and his children had already submitted details of their assets during the past 10 years. Likewise, Musharraf and Maik Qayyum also submitted details of their assets. In his remarks during a hearing of the matter on October 11, the chief justice said: “I do not want to retire (with even a hint) that I did injustice with anyone.”
The Chief Justice asked Zardari’s attorney, Farooq H Naek, to convey to the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leader that judges had no connection with anyone and they held no bias against anyone.