Musharraf review plea: Nov 3 steps violated Constitution, SC
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Wednesday stated that the steps taken by former dictator General Pervez Musharraf on November 3, 2007 violated the constitution of Pakistan, Geo News...
January 29, 2014
A 14-member larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani is hearing the review petition filed by former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf against the verdict declaring the sacking of superior court judges and other actions taken by him under the imposition of emergency as null and void.
During the hearing, counsel for Musharraf Ibrahim Satti Advocate presented his arguments and stated that in 2013, the SC received applications pleading to initiate treason trial against Musharraf and to put his name on the exit control list (ECL).
Justice Khilji Arif said that court had not issued any observation on the order given by the Sindh High Court. Ibrahim Satti responded that only the federation can decide to initiate treason trail against Musharraf or not, as it’s not the SC’s discretion.
Ibrahim Satti also read out the letter written by former premier Shaukat Aziz regarding the imposition of emergency on November 3. After the letter was read out to the bench, Justice Jawwad S Khawaja inquired if the ex-PM had asked to violate the Constitution of Pakistan.
Justice Ejaz Afzal said that the SC had already held exhaustive discussions on the former prime minister’s letter. He further remarked that the advice he had mentioned in his letter was not pertinent for the president to adopt.
On this, Satti stated that the debate was done by one person on which Justice Azmat questioned if he meant that the decision was passed by one judge only.
During the hearing on Tuesday, the chief justice observed that parliament did not endorse the November 3 steps of Pervez Musharraf.
Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani remarked that it was clear from the Supreme Court’s July 31, 2009 verdict that the constitution was violated by the imposition of emergency by then president Pervez Musharraf on November 3, 2007.
Ibrahim Satti submitted that the court allowed the former president to make amendments in the Constitution and changes were made in more than 100 articles.
“Musharraf had issued a new oath for judges following the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) of 2000 and former Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was also among those judges who took oath under the PCO,” Satti argued. He said the July 31 verdict had declared the proclamation of emergency as unconstitutional but it did not state that the step was equal to breaching the Constitution.
He said a reference was also filed against the ex-chief justice on March 9, 2007 while the SC ordered to the restoration of Iftikhar Chaudhry on July 20, 2007. “After the restoration of the former CJ, the referring authority did not file a review petition,” he added. He further argued that the original draft of the PCO was not made a part of the court’s order.
The chief justice inquired about the content of the original draft. Satti replied that emergency was imposed on November 3, 2007 after consulting the armed forces and army chief. “Governors, corps commanders and army chief were on board regarding the decision,” he said. He argued that the July 31 verdict was declared to be void in the Iqbal Tikka case decision.
Musharraf’s counsel submitted that a former prime minister had apprised Musharraf through a letter that the country was going through a constitutional crisis. He said Musharraf issued three orders on November 3, 2007. The first order was issued as the army chief, while the other regarding the judges’ oath was issued as the president. He said no one had claimed that Abdul Hameed Dogar was not the chief justice when he was at the helm. He said Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was restored through an executive order on March 16 and he waited for Dogar’s retirement till March 24, 2009. He submitted that when the case was initiated, Musharraf was not a party to the case.
