ISLAMABAD - Defense counsel in the high treason case on Thursday alleged that the prosecution had misplaced the material pertaining to the advice given to former President Pervez Musharaf for issuing proclamation of emergency on 3rd of November 2007.
A three-member special court headed by Justice Faisal Arad and comprising Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali resumed hearing into the federation’s complaint for initiating the high treason case against former military dictator General (r) Pervez Musharaf for imposing emergency rule in the country on 3rd of November 2007.
Commencing his arguments in rebuttal to the prosecution, Barrister Farogh Naseem, counsel for Pervez Musharaf, alleged that the prosecution has destroyed the material pertaining to the advice given to Pervez Musharaf for imposing emergency rule in the country on 3rd of November 2007.
Akram Sheikh, the prosecutor, in his arguments earlier had told the court that no material was found in the Prime Minister’s House that could prove that the former Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz had advised the former President to impose emergency.
Akram had told the Special Court that hence Pervez Musharaf was responsible only for the emergency rule.
Farogh Naseem requested the court to direct the federation to provide him all the material pertaining to inquiry and investigation conducted by Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) in order to ensure fair trial as envisaged in the constitution under Article 10-A
He termed the prosecution move by not providing material in the instant case to the defense counsel as malafide, adding that under Section 265 c of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPc) all the material regarding inquiry and investigation should be provided to the defense counsel.
“There has been miscarriage of justice on the part of the prosecution by not providing inquiry report of the FIA to defense side”, Farogh Naseem said.
He further submitted that it is also a violation of the Article 10A and 19A of the Constitution when they are not supplying material to him regarding inquiry and investigation of FIA in the instant case. There is no level playing filed”, he contended.
The defense counsel further submitted that in order to ensure fair trial in the instant case, all the material regarding inquiry and investigation should be provided to him if not then the case would be quashed or re-trial should be conducted.
“A lot depends on what the court gives its direction”, Farogh Naseem contended, adding that unless and until the material regarding inquiry and investigation is not provided, the defense cannot cross-examine the witnesses.
He expressed astonishment over the prosecution plea that Section 265 c of CrPc cannot be applied to the instant case. The defense counsel submitted that the Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act 1976 is not a comprehensive law and that is why the Supreme Court had ordered for criminal proceedings in the case.
He contended that if in some matter, the CrPC is silent then the court could issue directives under the Civil Procedure that’s why he requested the court to issue directives for providing the inquiry and investigation report of FIA to defense side.
During the hearing, Shaukat Hayat, another counsel for Pervez Musharraf, told the court that Pervez Musharaf is entitled to have all material before proceedings of the trial.
For the purpose of fair trial as enshrined in Article 10-A of the Constitution, it is the right of the accused to have all these inquiry and investigation report of the FIA regarding 3rd of November 2007.
In this respect, he submitted before the court that under Section 18 of National Accountability Ordinance (NAB), first an inquiry is completed regarding a particular case and, thereafter, Chairman NAB is requested for initiating investigation and when the investigation is completed then both the inquiry and investigation reports is submitted before Chairman NAB who, after evaluating and examining all the material then decide for filing a reference in a particular case.
Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing till today. Dr Tariq Hassan, a member from the Prosecution team told the court that there would be a fair trial adding that the prosecution will provide all the evidences collected in the instant case, adding that nothing has been concealed from the court.