Petition seeks Nawaz’s treason trial over interview

The petition was filed after Indian counsel presented ex-PM’s speech as evidence in ICJ


Our Correspondent February 23, 2019
Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif. PHOTO: EXPRESS

LAHORE: A petition, seeking treason trial of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, has been moved in the Lahore High Court (LHC) after an Indian counsel presented Nawaz’s last year interview to support his stance in the Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The petition argues that the deposed premier should be booked for treason and violation of his oath as premier. In the said interview that appeared in the wake of Nawaz’s disqualification by the Supreme Court (SC), the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader has said people allegedly went from Pakistan to carry out the November 26, 2008, Mumbai attack that left more than 170 people dead.

Pakistan asks ICJ to dismiss Indian claim in entiret

Treason proceedings against former prime ministers Nawaz and Shahid Khaqan Abbasi are currently pending before the LHC, the petition says. Jadhav was captured in Balochistan in March 2016. He confessed to his association with the Indian intelligence agency — Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) — and his involvement in espionage and fomenting terrorism in Pakistan.

Subsequently, the 48-year-old was sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court on charges of spying and terrorism in April 2017. In May 2017, India moved the ICJ against the verdict.

Pakistan rips apart India’s contradictory claims in Jadhav case at ICJ

A delegation led by Attorney General for Pakistan Anwar Mansoor Khan and comprising Foreign Office spokesperson Dr Mohammad Faisal, Director Foreign Affairs Fareha Bugti, Pakistan Ambassador to the Netherlands Shujjat Ali Rathore and others, appeared in The Hague to represent Pakistan’s case.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 24th, 2019.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ