LAHORE – The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday dismissed four petitions challenging the immunity status of Raymond Davis, observing that the trial court had started hearing the case and the same court would decide on the immunity for the US national, who is accused of killing two Pakistani youths in Lahore. During Monday’s proceedings at the LHC, it transpired from the mood of the LHC chief justice that the fate of Davis would be decided by the trial court of Additional District and Sessions Judge (AD&SJ) Muhammad Yousaf Aoujla.
Earlier, Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Naveed Inayet Malik submitted a reply by the Foreign Ministry informing the court that the accused was a US citizen who came to Pakistan on an “official business” visa and it was issued on a request by the US government. The attorney submitted that the US embassy had notified to the Foreign Ministry the name of the accused as Raymond Allen Davis and no attempt had been made to alter the official record. Chief Justice Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry was hearing identical petitions filed by Asif Hussain, Ahmad Masood Gujar, Barrister Iqbal Jaffree, Muhammad Azhar Siddique and Rana Ilumddin Ghazi against the diplomatic immunity and possible handing over of Davis to the US.
The DAG submitted that the US embassy had approached the Foreign Office on January 27 with a request to hand over the accused to the US Consulate General Lahore as he was holding a diplomatic passport, adding that the Foreign Ministry was not interfering in the investigation. He submitted that the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations 1961 and Vienna Convention of Consular Relations 1963 could be consulted regarding the questions raised through separate pleas.
Barrister Iqbal Jaffree submitted that it was important to establish correct identity of the accused through a lie-detection test and other means as well because if his real identity was different, he could be prosecuted under law. The counsel, Muhammad Azhar Siddique, contended that the government was obliged to submit a certificate under Section 4 of Privileges Act 1972 to ascertain whether Davis was a diplomat or not. After hearing arguments of all parties, the court ruled that the matter was pending before the trial court, therefore, it would decide the matter. The court, while disposing of the petitions, directed the DAG to submit a reply on a petition challenging Privileges Act 1972 by March 29.
