ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its judgment in the Bhutto case as the nine-member bench completed the process of hearing arguments from all parties involved.
The court will announce the verdict at another time, Chief Justice Faez Isa noted, as Ahmed Raza Kasuri – the applicant whose plea led to the execution of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto – was the last to present his arguments.
During the hearing, the chief justice asked why the attackers chose that time and place to carry out the ambush in front of others if he was the target, and whether it was the result of poor planning and conspiracy.
They didn’t know there were other people traveling in the car, Kasuri replied.
On December 12 last year, the Supreme Court began hearing a reference filed against the conviction, sentence and hanging of Bhutto — the founding chairperson of the PPP and Pakistan’s first democratically elected prime minister.
In a written order issued on the same day, the apex court said the hearing would be conducted every day and decided to appoint nine legal experts as amici curiae to assist the bench in deciding the matter.
The court also issued a notice to private television to share the entire interview of late Justice Nasim Hasan Shah in which he described the episode as a judicial murder.
On the other hand, the court order also mentions that PPP leader and senior lawyer Farooq H. Naek will be responsible for providing the transcript of the interview given by late Justice Dorab Patel.
Patel was among three judges who went against the majority opinion of four others when the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by Bhutto.
He would have become the Chief Justice of Pakistan had he not decided to resign after the then military dictator Ziaul Haq issued a Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) on 24 March 1981 asking the chief justices to swear him in.
As the hearing began, PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari filed an application to be a party to the matter, with Naek informing the court that he would also be his lawyer.
Chief Justice Isa noted that he could be heard as a heir as well as a political party and expressed his regret that the case was not taken up earlier as the whole of Pakistan can watch the unfolding of a historic event – the outcome of which would lead to massive judicial, social and political level.
Meanwhile, Kasuri also asked the court to allow him to present his arguments, claiming that no question of law was raised in the application.
However, the chief justice said they would first hear the arguments of Attorney General Mansoor Awan, who was to begin by reading out the reference.
The Attorney General read out the reference and answered various questions raised by the judges, stating that the late Justice Nasim Hasan Shah – who was part of the seven-judge bench that dismissed the appeal filed by Bhutto and later also served as the Chief Justice of Pakistan. – said in an interview that it was a judicial murder, and in another admitted that the orders of those imposing martial law in the country must be accepted.
He said no when Chief Justice Isa asked him if the original police record [of the case and investigation] had been found. However, Naek, who is representing the plaintiff, told the court that the police record consisted of three volumes of documents.
Given the sensitive nature of the case, the chief justice also touched on the availability of senior legal experts who could play the role of amicus curiae – a legal term meaning “friend of the court”, which can be a person or organization offering additional information to the court. or case view.
When asked if Aitzaz Ahsan would help the court and become amicus curiae, his legal assistant who was present in the courtroom said that his senior would not be available.
It is worth noting that Aitzaz – the PPP leader – is currently very close to the former PTI chairman and has represented him in various cases, with another party leader Latif Khosa leading the legal team as his lead lawyer.
Interestingly, Babar Awan – also a former PPP leader who originally proposed and filed the reference – became a close associate of the PTI and shared his advice on important legal and political matters.
It was then-President Asif Ali Zardari who, on 2 April 2011, through a presidential petition under Article 186 of the Constitution, called on the country’s highest court to seek its opinion on a review of the trial that culminated in Bhutto’s hanging on 4 April. , 1979.
Bhutto was removed in a military coup led by then army chief Ziaul Haq on 5 July 1977, which followed months of agitation as the PNA – Pakistan National Alliance – contested the results of a rigged election earlier that year in March.
The PNA was an alliance of nine opposition parties—including the JI (Jamaat-e-Islami) and the late Asghar Khan’s Tehreek-e-Istiqlal—formed when Bhutto sought a two-thirds majority to introduce amendments to the 1973 constitution.
This means that a nine-judge bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Faez Isa heard the matter more than 44 years after Bhutto’s execution in Rawalpindi’s Adiala jail and more than 12 years after it was filed.
The reference was last heard on 11 November 2012 by an 11-judge bench headed by then Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry – the fifth hearing in all.
The other members of the bench are: Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Musarrat Hilali.
Bhutto was arrested on charges of conspiracy to assassinate a political opponent two months after his removal from office and found guilty by the Lahore High Court (LHC) in 1978. His appeal to the Supreme Court was then rejected by a 4-3 verdict in February 1979.
The case related to the murder of Nawab Muhammad Ahmad Khan Kasuri in March 1974 when their car was ambushed. His son Ahmed Raza Kasuri, who escaped the attack, claimed he was the real target of an assassination plot orchestrated by the then prime minister.
The process at both the LHC and the Supreme Court has always been controversial because of the way it was conducted as well as procedural flaws. Result? It has never been cited as precedent in any other case in Pakistan.
