Akram Sheikh, in a written report, states that Musharraf's legal team's request was pre-mature. PHOTO: REUTERS
The case was heard by a three-member bench of the Special Court in Islamabad, headed by Justice Faisal Arab.
Musharraf’s counsel, Dr Farogh Naseem, had requested in the last hearing that the court grant disclosure and supply of copies of inquiries as well as the investigation report of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) that shows details of the abettors in the 2007 proclamation of emergency.
Labelling the request as premature, Prosecutor Akram Sheikh - in a written reply submitted today - said the issue regarding the co-accused can be raised when witnesses will record their testimonies.
Justice Faisal Arab questioned the prosecution as to why the suspect should be denied access to the official data to which Sheikh responded that only court can make such requests and not the suspect.
Adjourning the hearing till April 24, the bench said daily hearings will take place from that day onwards.
On March 31, Musharraf was formally charged for subverting and circumventing the Constitution by imposing emergency on November 3, 2007. Musharraf had rejected the charges levelled against him.
You can view the five charges levelled against him here.
COMMENTS (12)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
-(1)1714116455-0/Heeramandireactions-(2)-(1)1714116455-0-270x192.webp)
1714024018-0/ModiLara-(1)1714024018-0-270x192.webp)
It is the high time for Pak Army to wake up otherwise it might be too late.
Negotiate with Terrorists & Prosecute the person who gave something to Pakistan. & That something HAS NOT GIVEN by taliban.
Musharaf why don't you just say you are sorry, like you made Dr Qadir Khan say on national TV.
@Ch. Allah Daad-- Dissenting note is enough to show this is simple revenge by NS. and judiciary by one Hussain Asghar that Musharraf alone should not be tried and that his aides and abettors should also be made co-accused.
@Ch. Allah Daad..politician like MNS also want absolute power,PPO,attack on supreme court
@Tariq Mahmood...[(2A) An act of high treason mentioned in clause (1) or clause (2) shall not be validated by any court including the Supreme Court and a High Court.] but act of 12 oct.1999 was validated by supreme court..then treason case should be registered against all the judges who validated and power given to Musharraf to change any law at his free will.
Akram Sheikh might be a bad lawyer but an angel like human being. After bedding with Mansoor Ijaz, he seems to have moved on to the cases of national importance. He is doing these cases on nominal fees as a gesture of his commitment to the rule of law. At the same time, he is ensuring that his colleagues, helper boys, and butlers are adequately compensated with generous offerings in this time of extreme poverty. He also doesn't feel it just to incriminate the retired naysayer judge, or the remorseful politicians who are now in the rank and file of PMLN doing the good deeds.
Defence council's plea that president Musharaf while promulgating the Emergency on 3rd November acted on the advice if the Prime Minister .The contention does not throw light whether the advice mandated the president to promulgate provisional constitutional order forcing Judges to re take their oath of office .Mushraf 's lawyers must address this aspect before crossing the bar . There is yet another argument that trial for high treason should be started from 1956. The argument is based either on naïveté or is a clever move to distract from the issue . Pervaiz Musharaf is being tried under a special law which was promulgated in 1974 . Could his legal buffs throw light whether the law could be enforced ratro actively . Was Article 6, or an aquivalent Act available under the 1956 and 1962 constitution . If the answer is no then his team representing his case in the court and the media should restrain from giving spin to a straight case.