Musharraf attackers: SC seeks complete trial record
Convicts’ life terms were enhanced to death sentences by an army court.
File photo of former President Pervez Musharraf. PHOTO: AFP/ FILE
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court (SC) has sought the complete record of trial and subsequent appeals filed by two civilians convicted of involvement in the suicide attack on former president Pervez Musharraf by a military tribunal.
A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, directed on Wednesday the counsel for the Ministry of Defence to provide a detailed report on the trial process of Rana Naveed and Amir Sohail by February 28.
Naveed and Sohail, along with six others, were sentenced to life imprisonment by a field general court martial (FGCM) on July 21, 2005. They were convicted for involvement in the twin suicide attacks on Musharraf in Rawalpindi on December 25, 2003.The two men’s sentences were subsequently commuted to death by an army court of appeals.
In their review petition, filed through Advocate Hashmat Habib, Naveed and Sohail maintain that their sentences were enhanced despite the fact that the latter filed no appeal and the former’s appeal was filed 40 days after the mandated time limit.
“Though the Constitution of Pakistan bars us from looking into cases tried by military courts, we can, at the same time, see whether any department construed relevant laws in their true spirit,” observed Justice Chaudhry while responding to the defence ministry’s counsel, Advocate Mujeebur Rehman.
Rehman argued that an army court of appeal could enhance a sentence awarded by an FGCM even in instances where the convicts had not filed an appeal.
“How is it possible to convert a sentence of life imprisonment to capital punishment if the convicted person did not appeal against the decision,” questioned Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed.
The bench also expressed concern over the fact that the army court of appeals not only entertained Naveed’s belated appeal but in the process enhanced his sentence as well.
Subsequently, the defence ministry’s counsel took back his arguments after failing to satisfy the bench and maintained he would present further arguments after going through the relevant records himself.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 28th, 2013.
The Supreme Court (SC) has sought the complete record of trial and subsequent appeals filed by two civilians convicted of involvement in the suicide attack on former president Pervez Musharraf by a military tribunal.
A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, directed on Wednesday the counsel for the Ministry of Defence to provide a detailed report on the trial process of Rana Naveed and Amir Sohail by February 28.
Naveed and Sohail, along with six others, were sentenced to life imprisonment by a field general court martial (FGCM) on July 21, 2005. They were convicted for involvement in the twin suicide attacks on Musharraf in Rawalpindi on December 25, 2003.The two men’s sentences were subsequently commuted to death by an army court of appeals.
In their review petition, filed through Advocate Hashmat Habib, Naveed and Sohail maintain that their sentences were enhanced despite the fact that the latter filed no appeal and the former’s appeal was filed 40 days after the mandated time limit.
“Though the Constitution of Pakistan bars us from looking into cases tried by military courts, we can, at the same time, see whether any department construed relevant laws in their true spirit,” observed Justice Chaudhry while responding to the defence ministry’s counsel, Advocate Mujeebur Rehman.
Rehman argued that an army court of appeal could enhance a sentence awarded by an FGCM even in instances where the convicts had not filed an appeal.
“How is it possible to convert a sentence of life imprisonment to capital punishment if the convicted person did not appeal against the decision,” questioned Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed.
The bench also expressed concern over the fact that the army court of appeals not only entertained Naveed’s belated appeal but in the process enhanced his sentence as well.
Subsequently, the defence ministry’s counsel took back his arguments after failing to satisfy the bench and maintained he would present further arguments after going through the relevant records himself.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 28th, 2013.