SC makes AG’s statement, evidence in PM contempt case part of record

The Supreme Court on Wednesday recorded the statement of Attorney General for Pakistan Maulvi Anwarul Haq, who is acting as a prosecutor in the contempt case against Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, and made its part of the court record after thorough examination the volumetric documentary evidence submitted by the prosecution to establish that the PM committed contempt and was liable to be convicted. A seven-member special bench headed by Justice Nasirul Mulk and comprising Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Muhammad Ather Saeed, directed Aitzaz Ahsen, counsel for the PM, to positively submit the list of witnesses along with their statements by February 27. The court fixed February 28 as next date of hearing. During the hearing, the attorney general submitted that he reserved the right to submit additional documentary evidence and produce witnesses after submission of prime minister’s written statement in the matter. Aitzaz said he too reserved the right to raise objections if further evidences were produced by the attorney general. He said he would consult his client over the evidence so far produced by the prosecution and then file his reply on February 27. He said his client might go through the whole evidences as these were not in his notice. To a court query, he said on February 28, he would put forward his submission of evidences. Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa inquired Aitzaz whether he was willing to file a reply in the matter under Section 342 of CrPC, to which Aitzaz said he would get directions from his client over the evidence so far produced by the prosecutor and then file the reply on February 27.
In his statement, the attorney general submitted that he had already presented the documentary evidence consisting of four volumes in favour of the contempt charge framed against the prime minister. He said the evidence presented by him was enough to convict him on the contempt charge. The attorney general presented attested copies of 41 orders of the court passed in the NRO judgment of December 16, 2009, November 25, 2011 judgment in review plea against the NRO verdict, and afterwards including various orders passed in the NRO implementation case, which were flouted, disregarded and disobeyed by the prime minister. He said the first order for implementation of the NRO verdict was passed on March 29, 2010, wh ich also included paragraph 178 of the NRO verdict. At the onset of hearing, the court also dismissed an appeal filed by Shahid Orakzai against the objections raised by the Registrar’s Office on his petition against the appointment of attorney general as “prosecutor” in the contempt case. The court upheld the objections raised by the Registrar’s Office to the petition. Orakzai contended that the attorney general could not be appointed prosecutor in the contempt case against the prime minister, as he was appointee and subordinate to the PM. Justice Nasirul Mulk noted that the PM had not objected to his trial, while Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa noted that the court had the authority to replace the prosecutor at any time when it considered that the prosecutor was not proceeding in the case properly.