The Supreme Court on Monday issued directives to the federation to provide access to former President and army chief Pervez Musharraf's attorneys to meet their client for consultations in relations to petitions seeking his trial under Article 6 for allegedly committing high treason. A three-judge bench led by Justice Jawwad S Khawaja and comprising Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Ejaz Afzal resumed the hearing of identical petitions in the matter.
During the course of hearing, Raja Ibrahim Satti, the counsel for Pervez Musharraf, apprised the bench that Musharraf's attorneys, including Ahmed Raza Qasuri and Qamar Afzal, were being denied access to him by the relevant authorities for the last four days. Satti pleaded that not only Pervez Musharraf but also all those who were involved in the conspiracy for abetment in the subversion of the Constitution on November 3, 2007 should be proceeded against; and a case should also be registered against the then Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, who had taken oath under Article 91(5) of the Constitution, for writing a secret letter.
Addressing the court, Satti submitted that the Armed Forces take oath in accordance with Article 244 of the Constitution and Musharraf had taken two oaths, first as Chief of Army Staff and the second as the President of Pakistan. "The duty of the President is above his oath," Satti declared adding that in some instances the President had to set aside his oath and the Constitution in the interest of the state; he added that a president's prime duty is to save the State. Recalling political and legal history of the country, Satti argued that the doctrine of necessity was still alive, and pointed out that since 1956 till the Tikka Iqbal case the head of state continued to perform his duties even when martial law was imposed on the country.
He further pleaded that high treason was a violation of the oath taken by a President. He repeatedly told the bench that no action was ever taken against any president for violating his oath. He further contended that action should not only be taken against his client for placing the constitution in abeyance on 3rd November 2007 but against all the conspirators.
Satti added that if action was taken only against his client then it would be a violation of the Constitution as Article 6(1) stipulates; "Any person who abrogates or subverts or suspends or holds in abeyance, or attempts or conspires to abrogate or subvert or suspend or hold in abeyance, the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason."
He cited Article 6(2), "Any person aiding or abetting (or collaborating) the acts mentioned in clause (1) shall likewise be guilty of high treason." A member of the bench Justice Khilji Arif Hussain observed that Article 6(2A) was inserted in the Constitution under 18th Amendment on the basis of Sindh High Court Bar Association judgement. Justice Hussain further remarked that the hearing was not against an individual, adding that the bench had to decide if a treason case could be lodged against Musharraf under Article 6 of the Constitution of Pakistan. Justice Jawwad S.Khawaja said that no injustice would be done to anybody in the current matter and adjourned the hearing till April 30.
Comments
Comments are closed.