The Federation told the top court on Tuesday that former army chief and President Pervez Musharraf was solely responsible for abrogating the constitution and imposing emergency rule in the country on November 3, 2007. A three-member bench led by Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa resumed the hearing in response to a plea of former Chief Justice of Pakistan Abdul Hameed Dogar challenging the verdict of Special Court which had directed the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to reinvestigate the role of various facilitators in the imposition of emergency in the country.
Responding to Justice Tariq Pervez's query whether the federation's stance is still today that Pervez Musharraf was solely responsible for imposing emergency in the country on November 3, 2007, Attorney General for Pakistan Salman Aslam Butt replied in the affirmative.
Appearing on behalf of Dogar, Syed Iftikhar Hussain Gillani submitted that the FIA has written a letter to his client for interrogation on Tuesday (February 23) on the basis of a Special Court's order. Seeking the top court's directives to bar the FIA to interrogate his client, Gillani contended that if the FIA probes Dogar then the plea in hand would become infructuous, however, the bench declined his request saying the court cannot stop the investigation.
Earlier, on November 27, 2015, a three-member bench of Special Court headed by Justice Faisal Arab had issued directives to the FIA to submit a report after investigating the role of various facilitators in the imposition of November 3, 2007 emergency in the country including former prime minister Shaukat Aziz, Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar and the incumbent federal minister for climate change, Hamid Zahid.
While discussing the relevant law which had authorised the Special Court to proceed in the matter, Justice Khosa observed that under Section 6 of Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act, 1976, the Special Court had the power of high court's judge, adding that under Section 202 of the CrPC it has been explained that how a presiding officer of the court would respond to a complaint filed before him. Justice Khosa further said that under the Section a judge could only ask the concerned investigative agency to probe the truth or falsehood of the complaint at the initial stage and not when it is at the final stage.
He said that if at later stage the investigation is required then the trial judge could issue directives to the magistrate and not the JIT to investigate, adding that Section 204 of CrPC says that when the judge feels that there is enough evidence against any person in the case only then he could summon him. While concluding his arguments, Gillani pleaded that Musharraf's counsel have submitted a long list of witnesses including judges of Supreme Court and High courts, governors, chief ministers, prime minister, vice-CoAS and all the corps commanders and had prayed that they should be made party to the high treason trial as Musharraf before imposing emergency had discussed his action with them.
Later, the bench adjourned the hearing of the case for February 24 (today). Barrister Dr Farogh Nasim, the counsel for Pervez Musharraf, and the AGP Salman Aslam Butt are scheduled to advance their arguments today.
Comments
Comments are closed.