26 July, 2014 / Ramazan 27, 1435
pakistan-pervez-musharraf-670
pakistan-pervez-musharraf-670

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed its determination to interpret Article 6 of the Constitution even if the "relevant authority" was reluctant in doing so.

The remarks were made by the three-member bench headed by Justice Jawwad S Khawaja during the hearing of a treason case against former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf.

Justice Khawaja observed that the court wanted to create history by giving a verdict which would be quoted as a precedent in future.

During the course of proceedings, Ahmad Raza Kasuri, counsel for Musharraf, prayed to the bench to direct the Attorney General for Pakistan to take instructions from the newly elected government regarding the case as the caretakers had refused to initiate the case.

Justice Khawaja remarked that the court would perform its duty and pass an appropriate order over the issue even if the authority concerned would not be interested to initiate the case under Article 6.

He reaffirmed the case would be heard in a free and fair manner so that no one could raise any objection against any decision.

The SC judge further stated that the court would provide an opportunity to all the petitioners to present their viewpoint.

A K Dogar, counsel for petitioner Maulvi Iqbal Haider, terming Musharraf's action of November 3, 2007 of imposing emergency as illegal and unconstitutional, said no parliament will validate such an illegal action.

Dogar completed his arguments and the court directed Ikram Chaudhry, counsel for another petitioner, to argue the case on next date of hearing.

The bench subsequently adjourned the hearing of case till June 24.

More From This Section

Comments (23) (Closed)


Kausik
Jun 07, 2013 01:35am

The chickens come home to roost for Gen Musharraf self proclaimed savior of Pakistan.He was living cozily in London and suddenly becomes champion of Democracy and secretly hopes for Army to bail him out for any Legal issues such as breaking constitution and arresting supreme court judges.This type of behavior is unpardonable in any civilized country.He deserves punishment as per laws in Pakistan but mr sharif may let him go to avoid confrontation with army as they percieve insult for General who trash constitution of Pakistan.

Moiz
Jun 07, 2013 02:05am

Will SC decision solve Pakistan's poverty, energy, religious and all sort of problems ?. Please, people are fed up of media hypes and fake diversions from real issues.

Shahid
Jun 07, 2013 02:25am

The nation wants justice from the Supreme Court and have faith that justice will be done.

Faizan
Jun 07, 2013 02:46am

What kind of court is this? They seem to have already made up their mind with the comments made by the cheap judge. This is how you give someone a fair trial? Make up your mind before the case has ended?

Pakistani
Jun 07, 2013 03:30am

It would be injustice if only Musharraf will be prosecute for treason and not all of his Partner in this case. This will sent wrong signal to people of Pakistan.

malick
Jun 07, 2013 04:20am

No doubt that SC will deliver the ORDER but there is no out come of such ORDER like Asghar Khan case ORDER. Nation did not get any thing out of Sir Asghar Khan case. This is the time and SC should made party to new elected Govt. Decision over this matter without making new Govt. party means SC avoiding its own shoulder and using the executive shoulder, which are broken and injured shoulders.

Mustafa
Jun 07, 2013 04:23am

It may appear that the honorable judge has already pronounced judgment before completion of judication of the case when he observed "that the court wanted to create history by giving a verdict which would be quoted as a precedent in future."

S. A. M.
Jun 07, 2013 05:26am

The outcome of the court procedding can be predicted by a 5th grader as well. Shame on you Iftikhar Choudhry. You have given a bad name to constitution. You are using it feed fat your grudge against Musharaf only but just wait and see how it can go back to you like a boomerang.

Mustafa Razavi
Jun 07, 2013 05:53am

"Justice Khawaja observed that the court wanted to create history by giving a verdict which would be quoted as a precedent in future."

Ha ha ha ha, looks like Justice Khwaja has already arrived at his verdict.

Distressed Pakistani
Jun 07, 2013 06:26am

If the judiciary has made up its mind to take vengeance, nothing you or I could do. I really respected the judiciary before this case but I have lost all confidence now. The election commission also came from judiciary, and there laughable decisions have made them a laughinf stock all over the world (only Musharraf disqualified, with no charges proved against him yet, and others with proven charges allowed to contest).

Aijaz Ahmad Khan
Jun 07, 2013 06:54am

Dear Friends In a very simple terms, Mr Musharraf has voilated the constitution of Pakistan and he face the law according to its letter and spirit. Mr Musharraf must be senctenced according to article 6 of the constitution of the I Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Though there is no such precedent in the history of Pakistan but it does not stops the superior courts from implenting the constitution. The Courts needs to fulfil its duties and responsiblities according to constitution and let the political leaders deal with its political repercussions. The constitution gives the chief exective or the prime minister to propose to the president of the country to consider the mercy appeal of any criminal. It least a precedence will be set and the future of democracy will be much safer. We should put the our country and constitution first. As Mr Musharraf used to say, Pakistan comes first. It is very right time for Mr Musharraf to prove that he is true to his words. Let the justice take its course. God bless Pakistan, Thanks

K.A.Muhammad
Jun 07, 2013 07:43am

Though Nawaz Shariff has accused Musharaff for his unconstitutional action of over throwing democratically elected Government of Nawaz Shariff, unconstitutional removal of judges and their confinement and incursion of Kargil without Nawaz's (as the then Prime Minister) knowledge and notice, yet his (Nawaz Shariff's) complete silence and total reservation in the matter; especially after becoming Prime Minister with mandate of the people is indeed a matter to be ponder upon!

Why the Supreme Court had to categorically state that, " the court would perform its duty and pass an appropriate order over the issue even if the authority concerned would not be interested to initiate the case under Article 6".

The Supreme Court will now perform its Moral, Legal and Social duties, where as the aggrieved party will sit on the fence!

Well, we can see the actors on the stage, the director/producer is always behind the curtain!

MSA
Jun 07, 2013 07:50am

It seems that the SC is determined for vendetta. It is going to lower the prestige of the SC to a level that we never saw before. Do they realize that a vast majority of educated people of Pakistan are on the side of Musharraf? By doing what they are doing, they are increasing the chances of military take-over.

pakiboy
Jun 07, 2013 08:07am

from when SC start to act on its own .. when nobody is asking to run a case, why the hell they r so interested to pursue one ...

Cobrajock
Jun 07, 2013 09:02am

"Justice Khawaja remarked that the court would perform its duty and pass an appropriate order over the issue even if the authority concerned would not be interested to initiate the case under Article 6." - Is this statement / act itself not a violation of the constitution?

SM ZAKI
Jun 07, 2013 09:06am

Judges should not talk like villains of Punjabi movies. They should judge the facts and give verdict. In Musharraf's case some of the judges seem totally biased and seem trying to settle personal grudge. If they are neutral they should start the case from 1999 instead of 2007. so that all generals, politicians and pco judges, who endorsed his coup, could be put on trial for " high treason". let the heavens break loose. No matter!

Akhter Husain
Jun 07, 2013 12:13pm

I hope the words of Justice Jawwad.S. Khawja has been correctly quoted, that is,"the court wanted to create history"Would it be Late Justice Muneer type?The initiation of case under article 6 is the jurisdiction of the government and the court has already transgressed it by accepting the case.instead of out rightly rejecting it.Our judicial system provides opportunity to make history rather than accept the limitations imposed on judiciary. according to law and the constitution.

Sultan Khan
Jun 07, 2013 12:28pm

Article 6 is crystal clear and does not need any "divine" interpretation. Violators of constitution and their abettors must be brought to book. Subordinates are not abettors but those who are not subordinates and act out of their own free will to support the violators of constitution in whatsoever manner are the real abettors. Hence, those among the judiciary and politicians who supported Gen Zia and those among the judiciary and politicians who supported Gen Musharraf are to be given the same punishment which is given to Gen Musharraf otherwise the whole trial shall be a farce, revenge and a mockery of justice and the responsible ones shall be held accountable very severely on the Day of Judgement.

Sumair
Jun 07, 2013 01:01pm

Unbelievable....i thought judges hear the case in hand rather than focus on creating history or to solve global hunger for e,g, A petitioner has filed a constitutional petition and accused an individual of doing a certain wrong. the accused is defending and the constitution provides a clear modus operandi to handle such cases.

What right, then, this or any court in the World has to give statements such as these and to hear the case and decide in any way other than on the merit of the case in hand.

I fail to understand this. Where is the civil society? Whilst i agree that a dictator shouldn't be allowed to usurp our fundamental right, I am not willing to give this right to a judge also.

Let this charade and mockery of justice end. I think these judges are watching too much TV shows like Judge Judy etc...this is not a TV program for audience ratings. this is real World and they need to act in line with what their job description entails.

fida sayani
Jun 07, 2013 02:29pm

Musharraf must be given a fair trial and if proven guilty, should be punished. This trial should be a warning to the Armed forces of Pakistan, never ever to interfere in the internal affairs of country. Because the country belongs to children of Jinnah, who are the true owners of Pakistan.

Irfan Baloch
Jun 07, 2013 02:44pm

does Article 6 apply on the TTP 2nd in command? the leader of a terrorist outfit who gleefully claims the killings & bombing?

oh wait no, he is termed as a Martyr & his associates are called angry "brothers".

MushSupporter
Jun 07, 2013 04:46pm

Ok, now which Dawn journalist sifted through hours of footage to come up with the frame they have featured as the photo above ?

It is not indicative of the demeanor of Musharraf on that occasion.

So how are there "journalists" who behave like kids in picking out photos - one can just imagine the behavior in the newsroom.

Similar behavior was observed by TV channels, nearly all of whom solely displayed Musharraf combing back his hair (as is his custom) - but made to look like he is shocked and holding his head at his treatment in Pakistan.

Would this behavior be called journalism or even tabloid journalism ?

Hopefully someone else at Dawn will have the guts to publish this commentary on their fellow "professionals".

MushSupporter
Jun 07, 2013 05:01pm

Ok, now which Dawn journalist sifted through hours of footage to come up with the frame they have featured as the photo above ?

It is not indicative of the demeanor of Musharraf on that occasion.

So how are there "journalists" who behave like kids in picking out photos - one can just imagine the behavior in the newsroom.

Similar behavior was observed by TV channels, nearly all of whom solely displayed Musharraf combing back his hair (as is his custom) - but made to look like he is shocked and holding his head at his treatment in Pakistan.

Would this behavior be called journalism or even tabloid journalism ?

Hopefully someone else at Dawn will have the guts to publish this commentary on their fellow "professionals".