March 29, 2006	Wednesday	Safar 28, 1427

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

LAHORE, March 28: Justice Mohammad Akhtar Shabbir of the Lahore High Court on Tuesday dismissed writ petitions through which four Pakistan Air Force personnel had appealed against death sentence awarded to them for an attempt on the life of President Gen Pervez Musharraf on Dec 14 last year.

The court held that the appeals were not maintainable because of a bar on the jurisdiction of the high court to entertain such petitions against the decision of a martial law court and the court of appeal of the armed forces as enunciated under article 199(3) of the Constitution.

PAF’s chief technician Khalid Mahmood, corporal technician Nawazish Ali and junior technicians Niaz Mohammad and Adnan Rashid were awarded death sentence by a martial law court and later the court of appeal also dismissed their appeals by upholding the capital punishment. They were charged with detonating an explosive device through a remote control planted under a bridge near Jhanda Chichi, Rawalpindi, moments after the president’s motorcade passed by.

The accused moved the Lahore High Court at its Rawalpindi bench separate identical petitions seeking a decree against the decision of the court martial and the court of appeal. The petitions were sent to the LHC’s principal seat at Lahore with a request to Chief Justice Iftikhar Husian Chaudhry that a larger bench be constituted to hear the appeals.

The registrar office returned the petitions to Advocate Mohammad Ikram, the counsel of the accused, with an objection that they were not maintainable because the LHC had no jurisdiction to entertain petitions and appeals against the decisions taken by the martial court and the armed forces’ courts of appeal.

Upon a request of the counsel, the chief justice removed the objection and also conceded to his entreat that the petitions be fixed before an LHC bench on Tuesday (today) because all the four condemned prisoners were to be executed later in the day. The matter was fixed before Justice Akhtar Shabbir and the counsel submitted in his arguments that the court martial was not possessed with such a strong material evidence as to substantiate allegations on the four accused.

Counsel Ikram also submitted that the martial court was provided with the accused persons confessional statements with a delay of no less than 131 days. He cited certain judgments of the high courts which said that the only inference which could be drawn from the delayed submission of confessional statements was that they were manipulated under coercion and decisions based on such a material evidence stood no legal ground.

When the counsel submitted that the accused were not supplied with copies of the charge sheet and proceedings of the court martial, the court wondered as to how the accused had approached the high court in petitions when they were not possessed with substantial case record.

Counsel Ikram later informed the court that the accused intended to move the Supreme Court against the decision. He also told reporters that the four PAF technicians could not be executed because their families had yet to receive invitation for the last meeting with the inmates which was a legal requirement.