Terrorism trial: ‘Rehman Malik tried to influence court’
Chief Justice Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry also sought a detailed report from the anti-terrorism court about what progress had been made in contempt of court proceedings against Interior Minister Rehman Malik.
Lakhvi sought a transfer for security reasons and on the grounds that his trial was unfair. His lawyer Khawaja Sultan, a veteran advocate, said the anti-terrorism court was not independent, but being directed by the government, which in turn was “under the influence of India”.
Sultan said that the interior minister had told a seminar in London that the court had allowed the formation of a judicial commission to be sent to India in connection with the case, and such a commission would be sent to India in 7 to 11 days. He said it was only after the minister made the statement that the Federal Investigation Agency applied to the court for the formation and dispatch of a judicial commission to India. He said he and the lawyers of the other accused had not even had a chance to give their arguments on the application yet.
Sultan said that the minister’s statement constituted a clear attempt to control or influence judicial proceedings, especially when the trial was being held behind closed doors. He said that instead of taking action against Rehman Malik, the trial court had dropped contempt proceedings against him after government lawyers “clarified” that the minister had great respect for the courts.
Lakhvi had moved a similar transfer application in 2010 that was denied by then Chief Justice Khawaja Muhammad Sharif. He had argued then that his life was in danger from Indian spies in Islamabad.
Lakhvi and seven others are being tried inside Adiala Jail for their alleged involvement in the Mumbai attacks.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 20th, 2011.
COMMENTS (1)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
I hate when the leaders instead of making the way easier by cleaning their path they them self create roadblocks. Why can't we have a see-through clean-glass judicial system. Why is there any ambiguity about provision of simple justice to all anyway? I know, secrecy breed lack of trust and that agitate the masses. We must have an honest dealing with the neighbors starting from home. When you are making a beautiful house you don't wait for the sweeper to pick that odd piece from the foundation. Same should be done here, all office must bearers look for and remove any debris from under their nose, atleast. That's the fastest and most convenient way to get out of the hole we have dug for our self.