The court today announced the reserved verdict on an appeal filed by the former ruler against the death sentence.
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Wednesday upheld former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s death sentence awarded to him by a special court in 2019 in a “high treason case”.
A four-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Aminuddin Khan and Justice Athar Minallah conducted the hearing.
On December 17, 2019, a special court awarded the death sentence to the former ruler under Article 6 of the Constitution after a case of high treason was filed against him during Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz’s (PML-N) tenure for his “unconstitutional” decision to impose an emergency in November 2007.
On Jan 13, 2020, the Lahore High Court (LHC) declared the verdict, given by the special court formed to hear the high treason case under Article 6, “unconstitutional”.
The special court verdict had sentenced the late dictator to death for high treason under Article 6. Following this, the verdict was challenged by the Pakistan Bar Association and several senior lawyers including Taufeeq Asif.
The court today announced the reserved verdict on an appeal filed by the former ruler against the death sentence which was handed to him and declared it ineffective for non-compliance.
“Pervez Musharraf’s heirs did not follow the case even on multiple notices,” the SC remarked while rejecting the former president’s appeal.
Musharraf’s counsel, Salman Safdar, said that he tried contacting Musharraf’s family after the court decided to hear the appeal but the family never responded to him.
Musharraf passed away on February 5, 2023.
The court also declared LHC’s judgment “null and void” and remarked that the LHC’s decision was against the law.
During the hearing today, Hamid Khan, who represented Asif, told the court that Musharraf filed an appeal against the sentence which is a criminal appeal.
Meanwhile, Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman said that he opposed Musharraf’s appeal.
The court, after hearing the arguments, reserved the verdict.
In the previous hearing on November 29, 2023, the top court observed that all those, including the judges, who validated the martial law imposed by Musharraf on October 12, 1999, should be held accountable.
Justice Athar had also remarked that the judges who validated the imposition of martial law by Musharraf in 1999 should also be tried.
More From Daily The Destination: CJP asks Barrister Gohar Khan: “Who Are You?”
The chief justice had observed that “we should learn from our history” adding that “even if someone was not punished for abrogating the Constitution, at least one should admit that what was done in the past was wrong.”
The chief justice further observed that the primary aspect was recognition of the wrongdoing and everyone should at least accept that a wrong had been done in the past.
Justice Athar had remarked that one should speak the truth and the truth was that the judges who validated the martial law should also be tried and given a fair trial.
Tribunal Affirms Rejection of Imran Khan’s Nomination Papers for NA-122
In a recent development, an appellate tribunal at the Lahore High Court upheld the decision of the returning officer (RO) to reject the nomination papers of Imran Khan, the founder of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), for the NA-122 constituency in Lahore. The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) argued that Khan had been disqualified, and his proposer was not a resident of the NA-122 constituency.
The verdict was delivered by Justice Tariq Nadeem, a member of the appellate tribunal, following a thorough consideration of the arguments presented.
Imran Khan’s nomination papers faced rejection for both the National Assembly constituency in Lahore (NA-122) and his hometown Mianwali (NA-89) on December 30, 2023. The former prime minister, previously disqualified for five years in the Toshakhana case, had filed the nomination papers for the upcoming February 8, 2024 elections.
The RO, responsible for scrutinizing the nomination papers for NA-122, cited Imran Khan’s conviction in the Toshakhana case as the primary reason for the rejection. The objections, raised by PML-N’s Mian Naseer, highlighted Khan’s disqualification and the non-residency of his proposer and seconder in the NA-122 constituency.
Various objections, ranging from the Toshakhana case disqualification to personal matters such as having an illegitimate daughter and defaulting on social security funds, were raised against Khan’s nomination papers for NA-89 Mianwali. The returning officer aligned with the objections, resulting in the rejection of the former prime minister’s nomination papers.
This decision holds significance as it shapes the electoral landscape and underscores the adherence to legal procedures in the democratic process.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.