RAWALPINDI: The Special Court of Anti-Terrorism in Rawalpindi dismissed a petition seeking to stop the video link trial in May 9 GHQ attack case.
The court ruled that proceedings cannot be stopped until the Punjab government’s notification regarding the transfer of the trial is suspended. The court noted that, given the existence of the government notification and High Court orders, the use of video link has been clarified following the amendment to the Evidence Act in 2023. The court also stated it had already ruled on two prior petitions from the defence, remarking, “It is surprising that you do not read [them].”
After recording the statements of two more prosecution witnesses, the court adjourned the hearing until September 30 and summoned three additional prosecution witnesses for the next date. The court also issued a notice to the prosecution on a separate petition filed by the defence to re-call eight witnesses.
During Saturday’s hearing, lawyer for PTI founder chairman, Faisal Malik, and prosecutor Zaheer Shah were present. The defence lawyer argued that during the last two hearings, the petitioner could neither see any witness nor meet with his lawyer. He contended that the accused cannot be part of the trial in the absence of the former chairman. He stated that, with the court’s permission, he met the former chairman in jail, who said he did not understand what was happening in court. The lawyer therefore requested the trial be stopped until the High Court decides on the notification concerning the transfer of the trial.
The lawyer for defence clarified, “We are not talking about boycotting. Our demand is, where is the accused? We have filed a petition to stop the trial on the instructions of the former chairman, and the senior panel will give arguments on this petition. He asked for bringing his client to the trial. We are ready to cooperate because the client wants to consult his lawyers before every hearing and he has the right to hear the witnesses.”
Defence lawyer Malik Waheed Anjum stated, “I am the lead counsel of the case. Salman Akram Raja has instructed me to cross-examine the witnesses.” The prosecutor responded that they were still ready to argue on the request of the defence.
The prosecutor outlined that the accused had filed a petition in the Islamabad High Court in 2023 regarding his appearance in his cases and had challenged video link attendance in Lahore cases. He noted that the Lahore High Court has permitted video link trials, and after the 2023 amendment to the Evidence Act, the use of video link was clarified. “All applications are allowed to be used for video link. Five laws allow video link attendance of the accused. In fact, Section 21 of the Anti-Terrorism Act also allows video link attendance,” the prosecutor said.
He also argued that if the accused repeatedly insults the court via video link, it is not necessary to hear him, though the accused’s physical presence in court during a statement under Section 342 is necessary. The prosecutor cited a Peshawar High Court order stating that in case of a boycott, defence lawyers should give up their power of attorney, adding that “boycotting is tantamount to hijacking the court.” He suggested a reference could be sent to the Punjab Bar Council against the defence lawyers for repeated boycotts.
The atmosphere in the court became heated during these arguments, with bitter words exchanged between the defence and prosecution. The defence lawyers threatened that they would not allow the trial to proceed in this manner. Prosecutor Ikram Amin Minhas countered, “The trial of the case cannot be stopped under any circumstances.” He accused the defence lawyers of “creating drama in the court for the last two weeks” and making political speeches instead of legal arguments. He also claimed the accused makes separate statements in the Islamabad High Court, the Supreme Court, and other high courts, which is why the Sindh High Court has said that “the court cannot be held hostage.”
In response to these arguments, the court remarked that until the Punjab government’s notification is suspended, court proceedings cannot be stopped, stating, “It is the government’s job to issue notifications.” The court warned the defence, “The court has already given a decision on your two petitions. It is surprising that you do not read them. You cannot stop the court proceedings. There are government notifications and High Court orders.”
After dismissing the petition, the court recorded the statements of three more prosecution witnesses. The former chairman was summoned to appear via video link. Inspectors Ismat Kamal and Tehzeeb-ul-Hassan, along with Akbar Abbas, recorded their statements. The witnesses presented evidence including sticks, flags, police helmets, lighters, and pieces of military statues recovered from the arrested suspects. Inspector Ismat Kamal presented evidence related to a PTI leadership meeting at Chakri Interchange. The court subsequently summoned Yaqub Shah, Nazim Hussain, and Nida Javed to record their statements at the next hearing.