[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text dp_text_size=”size-4″]
On Wednesday, the Special Court’s decision to execute late military leader Pervez Musharraf for high treason was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa said, “The impugned passed on January 13, 2020, by the Lahore High Court (LHC) is not sustainable and accordingly set aside,” during the brief verdict’s announcement.
The ruling was made in response to a series of appeals regarding the 2020 Lahore High Court (LHC) ruling that declared Musharraf’s death sentence unconstitutional. The CJP-led panel of four judges on the SC bench, which also includes Justices Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Aminuddin Khan, and Athar Minallah, heard the cases leading up to the order.
A special court in Islamabad convicted the former dictator in December 2019 of high treason and sentenced him to death under Article 6 of the Constitution. In Pakistan’s history, this was the first time a military head had been found guilty and given consequences.
Read: Pervez Musharraf to be buried Today.
On January 13, 2020, however, the LHC ruled that all of the government’s activities against Musharraf—including the filing of a complaint alleging high treason and the establishment of a special court and its proceedings—were unconstitutional. The death sentence that was imposed upon him was abolished as a result of the verdict.
In November, the top court had fixed for hearing a set of appeals, including one filed by the late military dictator. Days later, it had also admitted for hearing appeals against the ex-president’s acquittal.
The counsels in this matter including Vice Chairman of Pakistan Bar Council Haroonur Rashid, senior counsel Hamid Khan, Rashid A. Rizvi and others had primarily challenged the LHC’s decision for having “no legal or territorial jurisdiction, corum non judice (not before a judge), the high court’s exercise of SC’s powers and the maintainability of Gen Musharraf’s petition filed before the LHC”.
While presiding over the case in November, CJP Isa had assailed the LHC for knowingly overlooking earlier decisions of the apex court through its 2020 judgment.
In a subsequent hearing, the top court had poked holes in the LHC decision, observing that it addressed issues beyond the scope of the initial petition.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
