News Analysis India

Tag: Pakistan Supreme Court

  • Ex-Pak PM Imran Khan invokes Arvind Kejriwal’s bail in Pakistan Supreme Court, here’s why? ,

    Jailed former Pakistan prime minister Imran Khan has invoked the case of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal getting bail to campaign ahead of India’s general elections, as he complained before the Supreme Court about the mistreatment met to him in jail. During his appearance on Thursday before a five-member Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa in a case related to amendments to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman complained of the “victimisation” that he faced since his ouster from power in April 2022.

    Justices Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Athar Minallah, and Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi also sat on the bench. Justice Minallah remarked that it was unfortunate that Khan was in jail as he was the head of a large party with millions of followers.

    Khan, complaining of oppression against him, pointed out that Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was released on bail by the apex court ahead of the Indian general elections for campaigning for his party but he was facing oppression in Pakistan which was under undeclared “martial law”.

    Khan, 71, complained that he was convicted within five days to keep him away from the general elections which were held on February 8. Khan also expressed dismay over the Supreme Court’s judgment rejecting Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s government plea requesting the live streaming of the case.

    “You wrote [in the judgment] that I did political point scoring during the last hearing. I did not get it, what political scoring did I resort to,” the PTI founder asked the CJP Isa. At this, Chief Justice Isa said a judge does not owe an explanation to anyone over the verdict. “You can file a review petition,” the top judge said.

    He also asked the former premier to speak only about the pending matter before the court. Lamenting political victimisation, the PTI founder said the Supreme Court should appoint a chairman for the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), the anti-corruption watchdog.

    “When the Opposition and government fail to evolve consensus on the name of NAB chairman appointment then a ‘third umpire’ makes the decision,” he said, adding that the anti-graft body is working under the “third umpire”. Addressing the PTI founder, Justice Minallah said: “Khan sahib, there was no reason to declare the NAB amendments invalid.”

    Khan said he was currently facing NAB inquiries and called for improvement in the anti-corruption body.

    After Justice Minallah reminded Khan about the issue of the appointment of Chief Election Commissioner, he said restoring the amendment would help him in the NAB cases, however, the country “will become bankrupt”.

    CJP Isa also barred the PTI founder from citing Islamabad High Court (IHC) verdict in the cipher cases and said the appeal in the case might be filed in the apex court.

    “Why did not you oppose the NAB amendments in Parliament,” asked Justice Rizvi. Khan cited the circumstances and said his government was toppled via conspiracy and that he did not want to respond to the “conspiratorial government” in Parliament.

    Khan also asked the court to compare the facilities given to him in jail with the facilities given to former prime minister Nawaz Sharif. However, in a lighter vein, Justice Mandokhel said the elder Sharif was not in jail at the moment, “Do you want us to send him to jail?” The chief justice remarked the court would arrange a surprise visit by the judicial officer.

  • Former Pakistan PM Bhutto, executed in 1979, was denied fair trial: Supreme Court | world news

    Islamabad: In a significant development, the Pakistan Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that the late Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto did not receive a fair trial leading to his execution 44 years ago, as reported by The Express Tribune. The apex court underlined that the trial proceedings conducted by the Lahore High Court (LHC) and the subsequent appeal by the Supreme Court failed to meet the essential requirements of fundamental rights for a fair trial and due process, as outlined in Articles 4 and 9 of the Constitution.

    Responding to a presidential reference filed a dozen years ago, Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa emphasized, “We didn't find that the fair trial and due process requirements were met.”

    Historical Background

    On March 18, 1978, the LHC sentenced Bhutto to death for his alleged involvement in the assassination of Ahmed Reza Kasuri, a founding member of the PPP. The Supreme Court, with a narrow majority vote of 4 to 3, upheld the LHC verdict on February 6, 1979, leading to Bhutto's execution on April 4 of the same year.

    Assessment Of Bhutto's Trial

    The nine-member bench, including Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, and others, posed pertinent questions regarding Bhutto's trial. The court questioned whether the decisions met the constitutional requirements of fundamental rights, due process, and fairness.

    Judiciary's Self-Accountability

    CJP Isa, announcing the majority opinion, emphasized the need for judges to decide cases impartially, acknowledging the importance of self-accountability within the judiciary. “There should be self-accountability within the judiciary,” he stated, emphasizing that progress cannot occur without acknowledging past errors.

    The apex court, in its short order, raised questions about the justification of maintaining the death sentence and the possibility of deliberate murder given the perceived bias against Bhutto. The court also noted that the referenced questions did not specify the legal principles enunciated in the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto case.

    During the PPP's rule from 2008 to 2013, former president Asif Ali Zardari filed a reference with the Supreme Court, seeking an opinion after analyzing judgments in the ZAB case based on fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

    Earlier this week, the Supreme Court reserved its opinion on the matter. CJP Qazi Faez Isa mentioned that the court is reserving its opinion, with a brief version expected before the retirement of SC's Senior Puisne Judge Sardar Tariq Masood on March 8.

    Utilizing Article 187 For Justice

    Justice Isa inquired about the possibility of issuing a brief opinion, to which Raza Rabbani, one of the amici curiae and a PPP member, responded affirmatively. The suggestion of utilizing Article 187 of the Constitution for complete justice was put forward, with Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar noting that this would lead to a verdict rather than just an opinion.