IHC seeks AGP's opinion on admissibility of Zahid Hamid's petition

Published December 8, 2014
Zahid Hamid. — Photo courtesy: Pakistan Council for Science and Technology.
Zahid Hamid. — Photo courtesy: Pakistan Council for Science and Technology.

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday issued a notice to Attorney General of Pakistan and has asked for his opinion on December 12 regarding a petition filed by Zahid Hamid against a special court order terming him ‘abettor’ in the Musharraf treason case.

The bench headed by Justice Athar Minallah resumed the hearing over a petition filed by the former minister for science and technology and also upheld the objections which were put on Hamid's petition by the Islamabad High Court registrar.

Giving his remarks Justice Minallah said the powers of the special court were equal to that of high court. He added that the interim order of a special court could not be challenged in a high court.

The court sought the opinion of Attorney General Salman Aslam Butt on whether the petition submitted by Zahid Hamid was admissible or not and adjourned the next hearing until December 12.

Zahid Hamid, the erstwhile federal minister for science and technology, has challenged a special court verdict that ordered the government to include him as one of the abettors in the treason case against former military ruler Pervez Musharraf.

In his petition before the Islamabad High Court, Mr Hamid – who was the law minister in Musharraf’s cabinet when the former military ruler imposed a state of emergency on November 3, 2007 – not only distanced himself from the act itself, but also insisted on a ‘solo trial’ for his former boss.

Mr Hamid had resigned from his cabinet position when the special court ordered he be tried as an abettor, on Nov 21. The order also implicated former prime minister Shaukat Aziz and former chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar.

A petition filed through his counsel, Khawaja Haris Ahmed, has been placed before the IHC. But the registrar’s office has raised certain objections on the petition, arguing that the high court lacks jurisdiction to hear this matter. However, the petition has been fixed before Justice Athar Minallah as an ‘objection case’.

Opinion

Merging for what?

Merging for what?

The concern is that if the government is thinking of cutting costs through the merger, we might even lose the functionality levels we currently have.

Editorial

Dubai properties
Updated 16 May, 2024

Dubai properties

It is hoped that any investigation that is conducted will be fair and that no wrongdoing will be excused.
In good faith
16 May, 2024

In good faith

THE ‘P’ in PTI might as well stand for perplexing. After a constant yo-yoing around holding talks, the PTI has...
CTDs’ shortcomings
16 May, 2024

CTDs’ shortcomings

WHILE threats from terrorist groups need to be countered on the battlefield through military means, long-term ...
Reserved seats
Updated 15 May, 2024

Reserved seats

The ECP's decisions and actions clearly need to be reviewed in light of the country’s laws.
Secretive state
15 May, 2024

Secretive state

THERE is a fresh push by the state to stamp out all criticism by using the alibi of protecting national interests....
Plague of rape
15 May, 2024

Plague of rape

FLAWED narratives about women — from being weak and vulnerable to provocative and culpable — have led to...