Connect with us

Law

Hearing in ZAB judicial murder case set for February 20 by the SC

Published

9 months ago

on

SC resolves the ZAB judicial murder case on February 20.

The murder case of former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was assigned for a presidential reference hearing by the Supreme Court of Pakistan (ECP) on Friday.

On February 20, the case will be heard by the nine-member SC panel, which is led by Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa.

Justices Jamal Khan Mandukhel, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, and Justice Sardar Tariq Masood are the other members.

The broader bench also includes Justices Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Hasan Azhar Rizvi, and Musrat Hilali.

On the prior hearing, the apex court had requested written submissions from the judicial assistants.

Asif Ali Zardari, who was president at the time, filed a reference in 2011 opposing Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s death by court order.

Timeline for the ZAB case
The long-dormant presidential reference on the late Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s death sentence has been revived by former President Asif Ali Zardari.

Filed in 2011 under Article 186 of the Pakistani Constitution, the reference reappeared on December 12 when Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa’s 9-member Supreme Court bench took up the matter.

The historical background of Bhutto’s death

The dynamic leader Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, who witnessed General Zia-ul-Haq overthrow his elected government in 1977, was put to death after a contentious trial.

The reference is based on the claim made by former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Naseem Hasan Shah that the Zia-ul-Haq administration had an impact on the trial bench.

The National Constitution’s Article 186 gives the President the authority to consult the Supreme Court on issues of public concern.

Asif Zardari has raised five important points that center the present hearing. These arguments are to human rights, judicial precedent, the justice of the death penalty, compliance with Quranic directives, and the adequacy of the evidence.

During the previous hearing,

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah questioned the lawyers during the hearings about the legal matter in the reference and if the court ought to address or look into the interview of one of the seven justices on the bench who rendered the decision against Bhutto.

CJP Isa said that even one judge’s view mattered, given the ratio in which the decision was rendered.

The CJP said that the court was now considering both the integrity of the law and an individual’s dignity. He went on, “The court wants to set a good example.”

“It must be seen whether the Supreme Court was guilty, the prosecution, or the martial law administrator at the time,” the top judge added.

Amicus curiae Makhdoom Ali Khan told the court that the former chief judge Naseem Hasan Shah’s interview served as the foundation for the Bhutto presidential recommendation. CJP Isa gave the court employees instructions to open the copy of the interview that the relevant channel supplied to the court.

Another amicus curiae, Barrister Salahuddin Ahmed, stated during the hearing that his wife was Nawab Ahmed Kasuri’s granddaughter and enquired as to whether the parties objected to his help. Attorney Farooq H. Naik stated that Bhutto’s heirs were in agreement.

Advocate Khawaja Haris, in a same vein, stated that his father represented DG FSF Masood Mahmood in the Bhutto case and inquired as to whether any side objected to him. The CJP said that everyone respected his neutrality and that no one had any complaints against him.

Raza Rabbani, however, took issue with Khawaja Haris’s status as an amicus curiae, leading the latter to distance himself.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest News

Conditional authority to announce reserved decisions has been granted to military courts.

Published

8 months ago

on

By

The case was considered by a larger bench consisting of six judges, including Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Shahid Waheed, Justice Musarat Hilali, and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan. The bench was led by Justice Aminuddin Khan.

According to the highest court, decisions in May 9 violence cases where the accused could be freed before Eid should be made public.

Mansoor Usman Awan, the Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP), then gave the court the assurance that individuals with lighter sentences will receive legal breaks.

The ruling from the supreme court on October 23 opposing the trial of civilians in military courts was brought before the court.

The Supreme Court (SC) rendered a 4-1 decision on October 23 in response to arguments made against the holding of civilian trials in military courts. PTI chief Imran Khan’s detention in the Al-Qadir Trust case, along with the arrest of other PTI leaders, led to rioting on May 9. The PTI chairman and others filed a motion with the top court to overturn the military trial of civilians accused of being involved in those events.

The accused wanted a trial in military courts, therefore the petitioners begged the higher court to overturn its judgment until the review plea decision.

In its plea to the court, the government stated in a report to the SC that 102 people had been arrested following occurrences on May 9 and 10.

In connection with the attacks on military installations, including GHQ Rawalpindi, Corps Commander House Lahore, PAF Base Mianwali, ISI Establishment Civil Lines Faisalabad, Sialkot Cantonment, Hamza Camp, Gujranwala Cantonment, and Bannu Cantonment, 102 people were detained, according to the application.

According to the Official Secrets Act of 1923 and the Pakistan Army Act of 1952, the accused have been placed under detention.

Continue Reading

Law

Meetings are called by bar associations to evaluate judges’ complaints regarding meddling.

Published

8 months ago

on

By

A day after certain Islamabad High Court judges accused the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) of “interference” in cases in a letter, the high court bar associations of Lahore and Islamabad summoned emergent meetings on Wednesday.

The president and secretary of the Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) invited everyone to attend the meeting. The association will devise a plan of action to resolve the judges’ concerns.

In reaction to the Islamabad judges’ letter to the SJC, the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) also convened a meeting and expressed admiration for the judges. According to Bar President Asad Manzoor, the attorneys supported the judges.

Judges of the IHC’s letter

In a letter to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) on Tuesday, six judges of the Islamabad High Court noted “interference” in judicial matters.

The letter demands the creation of a judicial convention to prevent overt meddling in judicial matters, highlighting the “interference of executive and agencies” in these matters.

It also promotes taking a stand to guarantee the independence of the judiciary via the convention.

The judges have also encouraged Qazi Faez Isa, the Chief Justice of Pakistan, and the Chief Justice of the International Humanitarian Court to take action against those who are interfering.

Justices Babar Sattar, Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Arbab Muhammad Tahir, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz wrote the letter.

Continue Reading

Latest News

The court requests an update on the missing persons case.

Published

8 months ago

on

By

The investigating officer was asked to submit a progress report before the Sindh High Court (SHC) on Tuesday about the matter of the missing persons.

The SHC’s division bench, presided over by Justice Nematullah Phalpoto, is considering instances involving missing people from various parts of Karachi.

The investigating officer informed the court that letters had been issued nationwide to different prison facilities and other organizations in hopes of finding the missing persons. Although there have been multiple meetings of provincial task forces and JITs (joint investigating teams), no evidence of the missing has been discovered yet.

The officer was ordered by the court to post the missing person’s photos in print and digital media. Additionally, the court ordered him to track down and turn in the missing people’s travel records.

The court ordered that a progress report be presented and postponed the hearing until April 25.

Continue Reading

Trending