Musharraf’s trial: No provision for treason in Army Act, says Sheikh
Former general’s lawyers push for transfer to military court.
Former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf. PHOTO: AFP
ISLAMABAD:
As former military ruler Pervez Musharraf’s lawyer has concluded his arguments in favour of transfer of the treason case to a military court, prosecutor Akram Sheikh told the three-judge special court that the Pakistan Army Act (PPA) has no provision for treason; therefore, the retired general cannot be tried under it.
Sheikh said the defence counsel cited the act a number of times but this was redundant as a full court bench of the Lahore High Court had declared Act 10 of the amendment to the PPA in 1952 as unconstitutional and invalid. A nine-judge bench of the apex court upheld this decision in 1999, he added.
Sheikh was responding to Musharraf’s concerns regarding the special court’s jurisdictional power to conduct the trial against him. His lawyers requested that the treason case be moved to a military court as Musharraf was a serving officer when the alleged offence of treason took place.
Section 92 of the PAA states that the petitioner remains subject to the Army Act even after retirement [referring to Act 10 of 1977], he added.
Justice Tahira Safdar observed that Section 2 of Act 10 states that the purpose of the Act was limited to when martial law is imposed in five cities of the country.
Sheikh said the section “extends to the areas in which the armed forces of Pakistan are for the time being acting in aid of civil power in pursuance of Article 245 of the Constitution”.
The prosecutor added that the PPA was amended twice – first in 1977 and then in 2007 – and the defence team was relying on laws that were never part of the statute.
“The blacklisted Act 10 (regarding high treason) was not even incorporated in a controversial ordinance issued in 2007 regarding the amendment of the Act,” he said.
Sheikh asked the court if it had seen CCTV schedule of Monday’s ‘drama’, when a war of words took place between Sheikh and defence lawyer Rana Ijaz. The court sought CCTV footage of the incident and said a decision would be reached later.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 12th, 2014.
As former military ruler Pervez Musharraf’s lawyer has concluded his arguments in favour of transfer of the treason case to a military court, prosecutor Akram Sheikh told the three-judge special court that the Pakistan Army Act (PPA) has no provision for treason; therefore, the retired general cannot be tried under it.
Sheikh said the defence counsel cited the act a number of times but this was redundant as a full court bench of the Lahore High Court had declared Act 10 of the amendment to the PPA in 1952 as unconstitutional and invalid. A nine-judge bench of the apex court upheld this decision in 1999, he added.
Sheikh was responding to Musharraf’s concerns regarding the special court’s jurisdictional power to conduct the trial against him. His lawyers requested that the treason case be moved to a military court as Musharraf was a serving officer when the alleged offence of treason took place.
Section 92 of the PAA states that the petitioner remains subject to the Army Act even after retirement [referring to Act 10 of 1977], he added.
Justice Tahira Safdar observed that Section 2 of Act 10 states that the purpose of the Act was limited to when martial law is imposed in five cities of the country.
Sheikh said the section “extends to the areas in which the armed forces of Pakistan are for the time being acting in aid of civil power in pursuance of Article 245 of the Constitution”.
The prosecutor added that the PPA was amended twice – first in 1977 and then in 2007 – and the defence team was relying on laws that were never part of the statute.
“The blacklisted Act 10 (regarding high treason) was not even incorporated in a controversial ordinance issued in 2007 regarding the amendment of the Act,” he said.
Sheikh asked the court if it had seen CCTV schedule of Monday’s ‘drama’, when a war of words took place between Sheikh and defence lawyer Rana Ijaz. The court sought CCTV footage of the incident and said a decision would be reached later.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 12th, 2014.