Contempt case: Imprisonment sentence was wrong, says Aitzaz
Aitzaz says it is not possible to give an imprisonment sentence without giving a reason for it.
LAHORE:
Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, commenting on the court's verdict in the contempt case against Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, said that the court was wrong in giving a sentence of imprisonment to the prime minister even though it was of a mere 30 seconds, Express News reported on Tuesday.
While talking to the media, Aitzaz said that he or the prime minister had never given any indication of not accepting the court’s order. In fact, he said, “The court’s order has always been accepted.”
“The fact that the prime minister quietly accepted his imprisonment sentence till the rising of the court is proof of that,” said Aitzaz, adding that if the sentence had been longer, the prime minister would have still complied with it.
He said, however, that it was not possible to give a sentence of imprisonment without giving a reason for it, adding, "And that too by the bench that itself was the prosecutor."
“We have these objections with the verdict and many more, both with the short order and the detailed verdict,” said Aitzaz.
Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, commenting on the court's verdict in the contempt case against Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, said that the court was wrong in giving a sentence of imprisonment to the prime minister even though it was of a mere 30 seconds, Express News reported on Tuesday.
While talking to the media, Aitzaz said that he or the prime minister had never given any indication of not accepting the court’s order. In fact, he said, “The court’s order has always been accepted.”
“The fact that the prime minister quietly accepted his imprisonment sentence till the rising of the court is proof of that,” said Aitzaz, adding that if the sentence had been longer, the prime minister would have still complied with it.
He said, however, that it was not possible to give a sentence of imprisonment without giving a reason for it, adding, "And that too by the bench that itself was the prosecutor."
“We have these objections with the verdict and many more, both with the short order and the detailed verdict,” said Aitzaz.