- Court says plea was not based on merit and arguments presented in its defence were irrelevant to case
The Supreme Court on Thursday disposed of a review petition filed by former president General (r) Pervez Musharraf against the July 31, 2009 verdict denouncing the proclamation of emergency by him in 2007.
The court’s 14-member bench headed by Chief Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani disposed of the petition citing that the plea was not based on merit and the arguments presented were irrelevant to the case.
Earlier during the hearing, counsel for Musharraf, Sharifuddin Pirzada said that unconstitutional steps had been taken several times in the country’s past and the judiciary had allowed these steps on important issues.
To substantiate his claim, Pirzada gave examples of Canada and India where emergency was imposed.
Justice Jawwad S Khawaja enquired if Article 6 was also applicable in Canada, to which Pirzada responded that not in Canada but in few other countries it was applicable.
While giving a reference of Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Pirzada stated that Quaid had prohibited federal courts from interfering in the matters of high courts and his stance was that the courts should not interfere in matters of the federal government.
Pirzada replied that it was essential for a judge to be impartial and a judge should pass judgments without accepting any influence.
The CJ asked Pirzada to point out which paragraph in the application proved the chief justice was prejudiced.
On Dec 23, 2013, Musharraf had filed a petition after a delay of over four years, seeking review of the July 31, 2009, decision but the review petition was returned by the court office by raising eight objections, against which an appeal was preferred.
The review petition argued that former prime minister Shaukat Aziz had recommended taking extra-constitutional measures of proclaiming the November 3 emergency.