Don't even go there: Court stops Awan from comparing his case to Afia Siddiqui

Babar Awan said that his case was like the trial of Dr Afia Siddiqui, initiated on a single piece of evidence.

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday stopped Babar Awan for comparing his contempt of court trial with that of Dr Aafia Siddiqui. 

The Former law minister and advocate Babar Awan, appearing before the Supreme Court for the hearing of his contempt of court case, equated his trial to that of Dr Afia Siddiqui with mere submission of an evidence.

Dr Siddiqui had been found guilty by a US federal court for assault with the intent to kill her American interrogators in Afghanistan. The charge carries a maximum life term.

On Tuesday, a two member-bench of the apex court comprising Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan and Justice Athar Saeed resumed hearing of the case. Awan objected to submission of evidence by the attorney general and requested the bench to note his objection in the order regarding its admissibility.

In the absence of his counsel Barrister Ali Zafar, Awan said that he did not want initiation of a trial like that of Aafia Siddiqui, in which a trial was initiated based on a single piece of evidence. Justice Ejaz Afzal though told him not to draw parallel with Dr Siddiqui’s trial.

He objected to Babar’s arguments and said that under the process and procedures, besides conventions and code of ethics, his counsel should place contentions on his behalf. Responding to a query of Justice Ejaz Afzal, Babar said that under conventions and keeping in view the relationship between the bench and bar, Awan maintained he had already adopted a path and submitted his apology.

Attorney General for Pakistan Irfan Qadir submitted a compact disc (CD) containing the press conference of December 1, 2011 addressed by Babar Awan over the memo issue and recorded his statement. Qadir told the bench that he was not an eye witness in the case, so he could not produce further evidences.

Justice Afzal told him that being a public prosecutor, it was his duty to argue the case further. Upon the bench’s inquiry, Awan requested that he be provided at least eight weeks to compile evidences and arranging defense witnesses.  However, the bench was less than convinced with Awan’s argument and adjourned the hearing till June 27.