The Supreme Court (SC) of Pakistan with the consent of amicus curie has issued notice to Ahmed Raza Kasuri to ensure the fair trial in Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Reference case.
11-member bench of SC headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad
Chaudhry heard the presidential reference filed for the revisit of case
of former Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.
The state counsel Babar Awan said the verdict in Iqbal Tikka case was
changed without hearing respondent’s viewpoint while Aitzaz said the
State is the claimant and Attorney General is representing it.
Babar Awan said no relief has been sought in this case; everywhere,
the words ‘reopening’ and ‘review’ have been used. He said that Farooq
Bedar who was prosecutor general in Bhutto case, wanted to submit but
court denied taking his statement.
Chief Justice said that these people did not dare to say something at
that time, now they are giving statements on TV channels for becoming
heroes.
Reacting to Iqbal Tikka case argument, Chief Justice of Pakistan
(CJP) Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry said, ‘That pertains to
unconstitutional measures taken up by a single person; but, this case is
of criminal nature,’ adding there is no need to ask anyone as to why he
imposed martial law; only Former President General (rted) Pervez
Musharraf was served a notice for his viewpoint.
During the hearing Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry remarked
that in the reference it was written that the case should be reopened or
revisit.
Babar Awan said the judicial ruling against Zulfikar Ali Bhutto is
considered a law; hence, the court can put in order any incorrect law.
Replying to this, the Chief Justice Chaudhry said this is not merely a
law; it comprises evidences and facts.
Justice Tassaduq Jilani said whether the respondent has no right to
present his standpoint before the ZAB ruling is declared wrong.
Justice Saqib Nisar remarked the respondent should be given the chance to prove that trial against Bhutto was quite justified.
Justice Jawwad S. Khawja said, ‘It will stand against just
proceedings of the case to say anything about the ZAB ruling without
hearing the respondent’s stance.’
Aitzaz argued against issuing notice to the plaintiff saying, the
state of Pakistan is petitioner in Bhutto case and the Attorney General
is its representative before the bench.
Later, the hearing of case was adjourned till January 2. SANA
