Ex-servicemen seek Musharraf’s military court trial

Some retired officers of armed forces stepped into LHC this week to rescue him from upcoming trial for high treason.


Rana Tanveer December 16, 2013
Former dictator General (retd) Pervez Musharraf. PHOTO: AFP

LAHORE:


Some retired officers of the armed forces stepped into the Lahore High Court this week to rescue him from the upcoming trial for high treason.


National Ex-Servicemen Society, a body of retired military men, filed a petition in this regard before the Lahore High Court. Major (r) Moeenuddin Qureshi, the Punjab president of the society and secretary general Major (r) Habibur Rehman Meo filed the petition. Both of them are practicing lawyers.

The petitioners told the court that all the alleged unconstitutional acts of November 3, 2007 were taken by General (r) Pervez Musharraf while he was the chief of army staff.

They said Musharraf should be tried by a military court under Section 31 and Section 59 of Pakistan Army Act for the crime of mutiny and insubordination of the Constitution.

The petitioners said three retired army men had been retaken recently on the army’s rolls for their trial by a military court for alleged corruption in NLC funds. They said as Musharraf had violated Article 6 of the Constitution while in uniform, he should tried by a military court. They asked the court to declare that the three-judge special bench formed by Supreme Court was coram-non-judice, unconstitutional and lacking jurisdiction to hold trial of a person subject to the Army Act. They further urged the court to order the government to refer Musharraf’s case to a military court. Justice Ijazul Ahsan asked the petitioners for more arguments on the maintainability of the petition.

Indian husband of Pakistani woman

The court restrained the federal government from deporting an Indian man married to a Pakistani woman and directed it to file a reply to her petition. Rabia Jahangir said she had married Zafar Riaz in 2005 and they had two children. She said her husband had been living with her in Pakistan on residential permit. She said the government had recently denied him an extension of his visa. She said the Foreigner Registration Officer had ordered her husband on November 29 to leave Pakistan by December 14.

Indian films

The LHC issued notices to the Central Board of Censor and the Pakistan Electronic Media Association (PEMA) on a petition by Pakistan Cinema Owners’ Association and distributors of films to become party in the case against exhibition of Indian movies.

The petitioners assailed the petition filed by a private TV channel host who is seeking a ban on exhibition of Indian films. Counsel for the petitioners said the petition challenging the exhibition of Indian films in Pakistan was illegal and a misrepresentation to obtain an ex-parte order which was directed at stopping the Central Board of Censor from certifying smuggled films only.

Migratory birds

The court sought replies from the ministries of Foreign Affairs and Interior and the Forests Department on a petition seeking measures to protect migratory birds.

The petitioner said millions of Siberian birds migrated to Pakistan due to harsh weather and later returned to their native land in moderate temperatures. The petitioner said that during their stay in Pakistan, the birds were hunted for sport. He said the hunt violated international laws. He asked the court to direct relevant authorities ensure a safe stay and exit for the migratory birds.

Celebrations on former chief justice’s retirement

The Lahore High Court Bar Association celebrated the retirement of the chief justice of Pakistan. Several bar leaders distributed sweets to celebrate what they called “Yaum-e-Najaat” (the day of deliverance). Judicial Activism Panel and the Justice Party, on the other hand, celebrated his day as Iftikhar Day.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 16th, 2013

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