Low Graphics Site
White bar
.: Latest News :. .: News in Pictures :.
Dawn e-paper
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Weather

FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Jawed Naqvi Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story


September 05, 2007 Wednesday Sha'aban 22, 1428






SHC to re-hear Benazir’s plea



By Our Staff Reporter


ISLAMABAD, Sept 4: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Sindh High Court to rehear a petition of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto seeking that the late attorney-general Chaudhry Farooq’s November 1997 letter to the Swiss authorities to establish that her foreign accounts contained ill-gotten money be declared unlawful.

“We are of the opinion that the SHC judgment is not sustainable in law,” a seven-judge bench of the court hearing the petition observed. Setting aside the SHC judgment, the apex court converted the petition into an appeal and remanded it back to the high court for re-hearing.

The SHC had dismissed Ms Bhutto’s petition on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction but it heard arguments of the parties on merits of the case.

Advocates Farooq H. Naek and Sardar Latif Khosa appeared on behalf of Ms Bhutto in the Supreme Court.

Representing the federal government, Deputy Attorney-General Sardar Mohammad Ghazi conceded that the high court had the jurisdiction to decide the matter.

In her petition, the then leader of the opposition in the National Assembly had sought that the government be directed to withdraw and recall the letter of Nov 6, 1997, of the attorney-general alleging that foreign accounts owned by her and her husband Asif Ali Zardari contained ill-gotten money.

She had also prayed the court to declare the action of the attorney-general to move the Swiss authorities as without lawful authority and that the decision of the Swiss magistrate and the proceedings preceding it were the result of misstatement, misrepresentation and falsehood contained in the earlier correspondence and the attorney-general’s letter.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2007