Musharraf’s request for documents’ provision rejected

ISLAMABAD: The special court trying former military dictator Pervez Musharraf on high treason Friday announced the dismissal of the petition regarding the provision of additional documents related to the imposition of emergency in November 2007.
While admitting that seeking evidences is a legal right of the accused, the special court ruled that the petition was impulsive and “untimely”. The special court registrar, Abdul Ghani Soomro, announced the detailed verdict of the court, which was reserved on the last hearing of the case on June 5. The court said the accused himself can get the photocopies of the documents from the offices concerned, and added the court will consider the application of the accused during the proceeding of the high treason trial, if he needed. 
The court termed the documents public property. It will resume the hearing of the treason trial on June 17. Earlier, the special court reserved the verdict on provision of additional documents to the defense team and adjourned the hearing of the case till June 13th. The three member special court headed by Justice Faisal Arab and comprising on Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali resumed the hearing of treason trial against former military dictator. During the course of proceeding Chief prosecutor Akram Sheikh submitted the court that former dictator imposed emergency in the country on November 3, 2007, being autocratic ruler, “as chief of army staff” (COAS) and kept the authority with himself as president to lift the emergency in the country. Sheikh added that the new CAOS was not even authorized to lift it on his own will.
Akram Sheikh pleaded the court that the cabinet meeting held before November 3, 2007 did not contain any agenda like imposition of emergency in the country. He informed the court that a letter from the then prime minister (Shaukat Aziz) was sent to the then president (Pervez Mushraff) regarding the prevailing situation in the country and this letter cannot be termed as “advice” from the prime minister for the imposition of emergency in the country. Chief prosecutor submitted the court that on November, 6th the cabinet was briefed by Sharif-U-Din Pirzada regarding the imposition of emergency of November, 3 2007 and Shaukat Aziz had not sent any summary to the president for imposing emergency. During last hearing of treason trial case Barrister Farogh Naseem, the counsel for Musharraf said the documents and details he had been asking for were not being provided to him. He also demanded that the details of meetings held in Presidential residence and Army House be provided to him and said the order to end the 2007 emergency and its summary have not been made unavailable to the defense team. 

comments powered by Disqus
  • DailyTimes.Official
  • DailyTimes_DT
  • Rss
Sunday Magazine
Aaj Kal