Against the backdrop of the evolving political situation and the ‘memo’ controversy still unresolved, the government on Friday suffered a serious blow on the constitutional and moral front as the Supreme Court dismissed its review petition against the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) verdict, declaring that the government had failed to build any case for a review.
In its short order, a 17-member full-court bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry held that federation’s counsel Dr Babar Awan argued in support of the review petition filed by the federation against the NRO verdict under Article 188 of the constitution for four days, but he failed to make out any case for review and dismissed the review petition.
The court told the government and the authorities concerned to implement in letter and spirit and without any further delay its December 16, 2009 verdict, which had declared the NRO unconstitutional ab initio. All actions taken under the NRO stand null and void with the dismissal of the review petition, leaving the government with no option but to withdraw the benefits given to all those who were facing criminal cases before the promulgation of the NRO.
GOVT STRATEGY: However, it remains to be seen what strategy the government adopts in the wake of the court’s order. “We will [implement the court decision]… let the court issue a detailed judgement,” Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Information Secretary Qamar Zaman Kaira said when asked whether the government would implement the court order or not. At the outset of the hearing on Friday, the government’s Advocate-on-Record (AOR) Mahmood A Sheikh had sought adjournment of the case on behalf of the federation’s counsel Dr Babar Awan, stating that because of some family engagements Awan was unable to appear in court.
But the court expressed dismay over the absence of Awan and the chief justice said Awan should have ensured his appearance as a 17-member full court was hearing the case. Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa observed that Awan had earlier created a scene for submitting some documents in the case but was now absent.
When the court ordered Law Secretary Masood Chishti to read out the documents related to the correspondence with the Swiss authorities in 1997, which were submitted by Awan, Chishti read out one document and refused to read more documents. Upon this, the court admonished him for not obeying its orders and said action would be taken against him.
However, the court asked Attorney General Maulvi Anwarul Haq to read the remaining documents, which he did. All the documents pertained to the years 1997 to 1999 in respect of investigation of the cases against President Asif Ali Zardari, slain former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and the late Begum Nusrat Bhutto pending before the Swiss courts.
During the hearing, the court observed that it did not want the names of the dignitaries to come to the surface, but since the federation had stressed for the documents, they were read out in court. “We did not want the names to be made public,” the court observed. During the four-day hearing of the case, the court had repeatedly asked Awan to prove how the federation was affected by the NRO verdict, but he failed to satisfy the court. Former president Pervez Musharraf had promulgated the NRO in 2007, granting amnesty to politicians, political workers and bureaucrats who were accused of corruption, embezzlement, money laundering, murder and terrorism.
The Supreme Court on December 16, 2009 declared the NRO unconstitutional and ordered revival of cases against those who had benefited from it. During the hearing of the NRO’s main case, the government had not defended it, but after the verdict was announced, the government filed a review petition against it.
Soon after Friday’s verdict on the review plea, the legal fraternity vowed to support the judiciary in implementation of its judgement on the NRO and stressed that the government should implement the verdict in letter and spirit. Talking to reporters at the Supreme Court, senior lawyers supported the verdict saying that the government must implement it. “We are with the judiciary and the government should implement the verdict,” Supreme Court Bar Association President Yasin Azad said.
