Against travel ban: SHC reserves order on Musharraf’s plea
Both parties asked to submit additional material, documents within 48 hours.
Former president Pervez Musharraf. PHOTO: AFP
KARACHI:
The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Thursday reserved its verdict on General Pervez Musharraf’s petition for striking his name off the exit control list.
A two-member bench, comprising Justices Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Shah Nawaz Tariq, asked the attorney general and Musharraf’s lawyer to submit any material, if they wish to, as part of their argument by May 31.
In his final arguments at Thursday’s hearing, Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Salman Aslam Butt claimed that the petitioner was now trying to avoid prosecution, alluding to his past record of skipping appearances before the special court constituted by the federal government.
Butt alleged that the petitioner thinks that the judges are biased against him, as he does not believe in the judicial system.
The country’s top law officer said there is apprehension that once the petitioner is allowed to leave the country, he would never return to face the high-treason trial.
Butt said the government does not want to take such a risk, as the offence of high treason falls within the ambit of a political crime. He explained that under the law any person accused of committing political crimes, who escapes any other country, cannot be extradited.
The attorney general opposed the request to allow the retired general to go abroad at a time when the special court was at the stage of recording evidence against Musharraf.
Barrister Farogh Naseem contested the attorney general’s claims, arguing that the special court conducting trial under Article 6 of the constitution had not placed any restriction on his movement even after recording the statement of the petitioner under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
He said the special court, through its March 22 order, had asked the petitioner to file a request with the federal government, which was directed to “must” pass an appropriate order on it. This order has attained finality since the government did not challenge it, he added.
He argued that the federal government’s move to place his name on the ECL is based on mala fide intentions, as the executive order should not tamper with the judicial authority’s order.
About the extradition law, he questioned why the present government had not sought the extradition of former ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani, who also faced the allegations of a serious nature.
Medical report
Naseem contended that the government has not denied the opinion given by senior members of the medical board, which has advised the petitioner to have a spinal cord surgery, but the facilities for such a surgery are only available either in Dubai or North America.
After hearing the final arguments from both sides, the judges reserved their ruling on the petition.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 30th, 2014.
The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Thursday reserved its verdict on General Pervez Musharraf’s petition for striking his name off the exit control list.
A two-member bench, comprising Justices Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Shah Nawaz Tariq, asked the attorney general and Musharraf’s lawyer to submit any material, if they wish to, as part of their argument by May 31.
In his final arguments at Thursday’s hearing, Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Salman Aslam Butt claimed that the petitioner was now trying to avoid prosecution, alluding to his past record of skipping appearances before the special court constituted by the federal government.
Butt alleged that the petitioner thinks that the judges are biased against him, as he does not believe in the judicial system.
The country’s top law officer said there is apprehension that once the petitioner is allowed to leave the country, he would never return to face the high-treason trial.
Butt said the government does not want to take such a risk, as the offence of high treason falls within the ambit of a political crime. He explained that under the law any person accused of committing political crimes, who escapes any other country, cannot be extradited.
The attorney general opposed the request to allow the retired general to go abroad at a time when the special court was at the stage of recording evidence against Musharraf.
Barrister Farogh Naseem contested the attorney general’s claims, arguing that the special court conducting trial under Article 6 of the constitution had not placed any restriction on his movement even after recording the statement of the petitioner under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
He said the special court, through its March 22 order, had asked the petitioner to file a request with the federal government, which was directed to “must” pass an appropriate order on it. This order has attained finality since the government did not challenge it, he added.
He argued that the federal government’s move to place his name on the ECL is based on mala fide intentions, as the executive order should not tamper with the judicial authority’s order.
About the extradition law, he questioned why the present government had not sought the extradition of former ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani, who also faced the allegations of a serious nature.
Medical report
Naseem contended that the government has not denied the opinion given by senior members of the medical board, which has advised the petitioner to have a spinal cord surgery, but the facilities for such a surgery are only available either in Dubai or North America.
After hearing the final arguments from both sides, the judges reserved their ruling on the petition.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 30th, 2014.