At the outset of hearing of presidential reference seeking revisiting the PPP founder and former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (ZAB) murder case, a senior judge of the Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah has questioned the PPP counsel over the maintainability of the reference.
SC’s senior judge Justice Syed Masoor observed that matter pertaining to trial of ZAB had attained finality as a review petition had been dismissed earlier, so how can the apex court re-open the case that has already been concluded.
It may be mentioned here that a nine-member bench of the apex court headed by CJP Justice Qazi Faez Isa heard the presidential reference seeking revisiting the ZAB murder case.
The apex court heard the attorney general and PPP counsel Farooq H Naek, and adjourned the hearing till second week of January, 2024. The court also appointed amicus curiae (friends of court) having expertise on criminal and constitutional fields for its assistance in the presidential reference. The proceedings were broadcasted live at the Supreme Court website.
The CJP, while dictating the order of the court proceedings, noted that the application of Naek had become infructuous as the SC committee has already decided in that regard.
Justice Syed Mansoor observed that matter pertaining to trial of ZAB had already attained finality as a review petition had also been dismissed; therefore, the apex court had no jurisdiction to hear a second review petition.
The judge asked Naek as to what decision the court could give, and asked him to assist the court on the question of maintainability.
Meanwhile, the court after the hearing the matter, dictating its order and noted that Attorney General Mansoor Usman read out the presidential reference as well as the order of the court given on April 21, 2011, containing the questions to be addressed. The court noted down in its order that the reference was filed in 2011 and the last hearing was held in 2012.
It noted that in the same order a number of amicus curies who were appointed among them some have passed away while some are alive. Ali Ahmed Kurd advocate, who was also among those amicus curies has consented to assist the court, while Makhdom Ali Khan is also willing to do so as well, the order noted, adding that the court consider to appoint constitutional experts, particularly on the scope of Article 186 whereby the presidential reference was filed, and the question of maintainability of the reference. The order noted that it needed wisdom of criminal experts, so name of Justice (retd) Manzoor Ahmed Malik was proposed, and the parties supported it.
Accordingly, subject to his assent, he is appointed as amicus curiae and he may submit a concise statement in this regard, the court noted and also appointed Khwaja Haris as amicus curiae. Haris was the Punjab advocate general when the case was earlier heard by the Supreme Court. The court also appointed Salman Safdar as amicus curiae on criminal side as well as Faisal Siddiqui advocate on constitutional side to assist it. Farooq Naek raised objections on the two lawyers.
The court, however, turned down the objections and held that it was its prerogative to appoint amicus curiae. The court also appointed Raza Rabani as amicus curiae on constitutional side besides appointing also former AG Khalid Javed Khan, Salahuddin Ahmed, Barrister Zahid Ibrahim and Yasir Qurashi as amicus curiae on constitutional side.
Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, however, refused to assist the court as amicus curiae.
The court further noted down in its order that the reference has also referred to former CJP Nasim Hassan Shah in the case ZAB versus the state, the review decision in ZAB case – PLD 1979-SC 741 – and the interview of the Justice Nasim with a private TV channel (Geo TV) anchor Iftikhar Ahmed. The court issued notice to the TV channel for providing the transcript of whole interview.
During the course of hearing Ahmed Raza Kasuri, who had lodged the FIR against ZAB, pleaded the court to adjourn the hearing until after general elections as he pleaded that the PPP will exploit the verdict of the apex court for its election campaign.
Kasuri submitted that this case should not be used for elections. However, CJP told Kasuri that many references were filed in the apex court after the present, adding that at that time there were also some election matters but the references were heard.
Meanwhile, while speaking to the workers in Gujranwala, PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari said that “we are grateful to the Supreme Court for finally hearing the Zulfikar Bhutto reference after 12 years.” According to him, the judiciary has the opportunity to rectify the history in the ‘murder’ case of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Although it is utmost desire of the PPP Chairman, but still, it has to be decided by the apex court in its final verdict after hearing the case. Until that time, everyone should wait.
Comments are closed.