muhammadhafeezmalik
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2015
- Messages
- 5,417
- Reaction score
- -17
- Country
- Location
The amendment for collaborators was made in April 2010 in 18th amendment, so it was not a crime till that.
Musharaf handed over death sentence
- Thread starter RIP Pak LAW
- Start date
The amendment for collaborators was made in April 2010 in 18th amendment, so it was not a crime till that.
Enigma SIG
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2009
- Messages
- 8,593
- Reaction score
- -5
- Country
- Location
You forgot the yellow journalists.
Mentee
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Messages
- 11,103
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Every department must be headed over by a gentle man cadet. Kick all others out
pkuser2k12
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2012
- Messages
- 6,460
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
StormBreaker
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 5,448
- Reaction score
- 16
- Country
- Location
*breathes in peace*
What a country that would be !!!
pakpride00090
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2019
- Messages
- 2,726
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Yeh log karte rahein esi harkatein ... phir jab army demoralize hojaegi our jab external forces havy honge...phir in logon ki cheechen niklengi ... liken mujhe lagta hai in sab ke pass foreign nationalities hain our suffer karenge aam log.
Mentee
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Messages
- 11,103
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Hum sb ko Arabian ocean m push kr k mulk ko kundi lga dy gy. What a disciplined and wealthy state pak would become
pkuser2k12
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2012
- Messages
- 6,460
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Areesh
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2010
- Messages
- 45,157
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Mentee
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Messages
- 11,103
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
You are comparing apples VS oranges. What does an ordinary bail proceeding got to do with article 6? Let me reiterate for one more time, any ordinary guy would have got the bail earlier than our political bigwigs but they gonna still face the trial. Not making it up its the legal practice around the world.
PakSword
MODERATOR
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2015
- Messages
- 19,505
- Reaction score
- 103
- Country
- Location
As I said, I don't mind.. because constitution is supreme..
My point is different, why only him? Those who supported him in legalizing his **First** action in 1999, and took oath (such as the judges) under him, why are they spared?
Regarding Nawaz Sharif, diverting a country's COAS plane to an enemy country (if true) is a more serious crime (even if there's no law to cover this kind of act). Dismissing a COAS from service is not a objectionable act, dismissing a COAS when he is in air (along with 100s of passengers) and diverting that plane to enemy's territory is not just objectionable, but the culprits should be handed worst possible punishments..
Areesh
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2010
- Messages
- 45,157
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
You missed one thing
He has been given death sentence on 2007 and not 1999
That itself says a lot
PakSword
MODERATOR
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2015
- Messages
- 19,505
- Reaction score
- 103
- Country
- Location
That's why I want to start it from 1999.. But if they start from 1999, most of the judges/ ex-judges will go with him.
This is a prime example of selective justice..
Pan-Islamic-Pakistan
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- May 28, 2018
- Messages
- 13,153
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Judiciary is fvcked up ...... Lawyers killed patients in the hospital and SC is silent. Where the fvck are aider and abettor under article 6...... All are free and death only for him.......if judges have balls then fully implement the article 6, not only for him. And all are free .... hate this judges who failed to implement the law
UNACCEPTABLE
Special court hands death penalty to former military dictator Musharraf in high treason case
Rana Bilal | Naveed Siddiqui | Haseeb BhattiUpdated December 17, 2019
Facebook Count145
Twitter Share
7
A three-member special court announced its verdict in the long-drawn high treason case against former military ruler Pervez Musharraf today. — AFP/File
In a first in Pakistan's history, a three-member bench of the special court, headed by Peshawar High Court Chief Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth, on Tuesday handed former military ruler Pervez Musharraf death sentence in the long-drawn high treason case against him.
A detailed verdict — split 2-1 — will be issued in 48 hours.
The former military chief is currently in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. The high treason trial of the former military dictator for clamping the state of emergency on Nov 3, 2007, had been pending since December 2013.
He was booked in the treason case in December 2013. Musharraf was indicted on March 31, 2014, and the prosecution had tabled the entire evidence before the special court in September the same year. However, due to litigation at appellate forums, the trial of the former military dictator lingered on and he left Pakistan in March 2016.
The special court — comprising Justice Seth, Justice Nazar Akbar of the Sindh High Court (SHC) and Justice Shahid Karim of the LHC — announced the verdict it had reserved on November 19.
The special court at that time had said it would announce the verdict on Nov 28 on the basis of available record.
However, days before the final verdict was to be announced, the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) government sought deferment of the announcement of the verdict and in a fresh petition, requested the Islamabad High Court that “the special court be restrained from passing final judgement in the trial”. Subsequently, on November 27, the IHC stopped the special court from issuing its verdict reserved in the case on November 19. Additionally, they directed the government to notify a prosecution team by December 5.
On December 5, the new prosecution team for the government appeared before the special court after which the special court adjourned proceedings till December 17, adding that it would hear arguments and announce the verdict on the same day.
Three more petitions
Earlier, the government's prosecutor, Advocate Ali Zia Bajwa, said that they had submitted three petitions today.
One of the petitions asked that the court make three individuals — former prime minister Shaukat Aziz, former Supreme Court chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar and former law minister Zahid Hamid — suspects in the case.
"We want to make Musharraf's facilitators and companions suspects as well. It it important that the trial of all suspects is held at the same time," the prosecutor said.
"Submitting such a request after three and a half years means the government doesn't have the right intentions. Today the case was set for final arguments and now new petitions have been submitted," remarked Justice Karim.
Justice Akbar questioned the lawyer regarding the evidence against the individuals that the government wanted to include in the case.
"The stage of investigations and [presenting] evidence has passed. Has there been a new investigation against the included suspects?" he asked, in response to which the prosecutor said that an investigation can only be carried out after the complaint is registered.
The prosecutor said that according to a 2014 petition, Shaukat Aziz had told Musharraf to impose emergency.
Justice Akbar remarked that the prosecutor was referring to Musharraf's petition in which the verdict has been reserved while Justice Karim added that the Supreme Court has also issued a verdict on a petition regarding other suspects.
Justice Akbar said two weeks had been earlier granted to the government to present a modified charge sheet. "As per the law, charged can be amended anytime before the verdict," responded the prosecutor.
"If you want to further make anyone a suspect, submit a new case," said Justice Karim, asking: "Does the government want to delay Musharraf's trial?"
"If three individuals are made suspects, the government should also submit requests to make the former cabinet and corps commanders suspects," he added.
Justice Karim said that without the court's permission, indictments cannot be amended. Justice Akbar added that no formal request had been received by the court for changes to the charge sheet.
"Without the court's permission, no new request can be submitted," said Justice Karim, adding: "We will not hear arguments on a request that was not formally submitted."
"The prosecution doesn't even know how to submit a request in the court," remarked Justice Akbar, at which the prosecutor apologised. "Your purpose was just to get through today," the judge noted.
Justice Karim asked how the interior secretary can amend the charge sheet without the approval of the cabinet. "Where is the approval of the federal government and the cabinet? According to a Supreme Court verdict, the federal government means the cabinet," he said.
He added that if the government doesn't want there to be a delay, it can submit a new request against the other suspects.
A second prosecutor, Munir Bhatti, said the former prosecutor had hidden facts from the court. In October, the special court was informed that the government had sacked the entire prosecution team engaged by the previous PML-N government to prosecute the high treason case against Musharraf.
"What action has the government taken against the former prosecutor?" asked Justice Akbar.
Justice Karim said with regards to the federal government, the apex court has issued directives in the Mustafa Impex case. "After the Supreme Court's directive is issued, the federal cabinet can make a decision, not the interior secretary," he said.
In the Mustafa Impex case, the Supreme Court had ultimately struck down notifications which were not issued with the approval of the cabinet.
It is pertinent to mention that the special court last month had also reserved its verdict in the long-drawn high treason case. However, an Islamabad High Court (IHC) order on November 27 — a day before the special court was set to announce its verdict — stopped the special court from doing so after the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) government sought deferment of the announcement of the verdict.
LHC recommends full bench hear Musharraf's petition
Earlier in the day, the Lahore High Court (LHC) took up Musharraf's petition against the special court hearing the high treason case against him as well as his civil miscellaneous application that urged the high court to halt the treason proceedings.
Justice Syed Mazahar Akbar Ali Naqvi sent the file regarding Musharraf's case to the high court chief justice, recommending that a full bench be formed.
On Monday, the LHC issued a notice to the federal government to submit a written reply on Musharraf's application in which he asked the high court to declare the proceedings pending before the special court and all actions against him — from initiation of the high treason complaint to the appointment of the prosecutor and constitution of the trial court — as unconstitutional.
The court had decided that it would hear the application today alongside the main petition submitted against the treason case proceedings.
During today's proceedings, Additional Attorney General Chaudhry Ishtiaq A. Khan appeared in court on the government's behalf while Khawaja Ahmad Tariq Raheem and Azhar Siddique represented Musharraf.
The court asked how the LHC could hear the petitions if the petitioner is a resident of Islamabad and asked for an example of another case on the basis of which the high court could hear the petition. Musharraf's counsel Siddique said this had been done in the LNG case.
The court also asked if the high treason case against Musharraf would be heard in Islamabad today, in response to which AAG Khan said the special court will hear the high treason case and has also said it will announce the verdict today.
"Till the suspect's statement is not recorded under Section 342 [of the Criminal Procedure Code], how can that happen?" the judge asked.
On Saturday, in an application filed through advocates Khawaja Ahmad Tariq Raheem and Azhar Siddique, Musharraf had asked the LHC to stay the trial at the special court until his earlier petition pending adjudication by the high court is decided. In that petition, the former dictator had challenged the formation of a special court holding his trial under charges of high treason and legal flaws committed in the procedure.
IHC verdict binding on special court
The special court had observed that while it would not comment on the maintainability of the IHC order, the members of the three-judge court were of the view that the IHC’s order was not binding on them.
The IHC, however, ruled that its order of stopping the special court from announcing its verdict in the treason case was binding on it (special court) regardless of the fact that it comprises three high court judges.
The IHC in the written order stated: "A plain reading of the Act of 1976 [The Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act] unambiguously shows that the Federal Government and the prosecution have a pivotal role. The trial proceedings under the Act of 1976, from initiation till conclusion, are dependent on the presence of the prosecution appointed by the Federal Government…The Special Court cannot, therefore, pronounce the judgement without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appointed prosecutor."
According to the IHC order, the Act of 1976 reads as a whole unequivocally makes it obvious that the trial proceedings are entirely dependent on the prosecution and that in its absence or without hearing it, judgement cannot be announced.
Facebook Count145
Twitter Share
7
Read more
Notice to Centre on Musharraf’s fresh plea in treason case
Special court to announce verdict in Musharraf treason case on Dec 17
'State of emergency': A timeline of the long-drawn high treason trial of General Pervez Musharraf
On DawnNews
Comments (7)
ALSO SUBMIT TO NEWSPAPER
To submit your comment online and to the Letters Desk, enter your phone number/city below
Your number will remain private and will be deleted from our servers in 48hrs
1000 CHARACTERS
COMMENT MOD POLICY
Tahir
about an hour ago
Shame. Special court should announce the verdict today.
Recommend 1
Qasim
about an hour ago
Nobody's interested in him, we're more interested in people who looted billions of rupees of our money! The ones who put us in the position we are in today.
Recommend 9
Ali Mansoor
11 minutes ago
Finally Naya Pakistan
Recommend 3
READ ALL COMMENTS
Alhamdulilah, dream is alive. Musharraf and Zardari next.
All enemies of Pakistan should face accountability.
Similar threads
