Musharraf property confiscation

Special Court asks prosecutor, Sehba Musharraf’s counsel to file arguments

ISLAMABAD: The Special Court on Friday directed prosecutor and counsel for Begum Sehba Musharraf, spouse of former president General (R) Pervez Musharraf, to file synopsis for their respective arguments on the matter pertaining to confiscation of properties.

A three-member bench of the Special Court headed by Justice Yahya Afridi and comprising Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali was scheduled to hear the objection pleas regarding attachment of former army chief and president Pervez Musharraf’s properties. However, Justice Tahira Safdar was not present in the bench.

Family members of former president including Begum Sehba Musharraf, daughter Ayla Raza and Huma Khaishgi, the deceased sister of Sehba and shareholder of property through their counsel Faisal Hussain Chaudhry had filed a joint objection petition with the plea that the properties in question were owned by them.

They had submitted to revoke the attachment order requesting the court to not treat her husband as an absconder because he left the country purely on medical grounds.

Last year on July 19, the Special Court’s three-member bench headed by Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel, the then chief justice of Peshawar High Court (PHC), and comprising Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali had attached the moveable and immovable properties of Musharraf in the high treason case. Now after the elevation of Mazhar Alam Miankhel as a judge of the Supreme Court, the Special Court is headed CJ PHC Justice Yahya Afridi.

During the hearing, prosecutor Akram Sheikh urged the court to issue directives to seize Pervez Musharraf’s properties in London as well. Justice Yahya Afridi asked the prosecutor to file written reply in response to objection pleas in the matter, whereas the bench sought details of Musharraf from the federal Interior Ministry.

Counsel for Sehba Musharraf submitted that an adjournment application has been filed on behalf of his client to which the bench issued notices to prosecutor and the respondent in the matter.

The bench observed that question before the court is whether it could direct to confiscate the properties to which Akram Sheikh pleaded that during the previous hearings of the case the court had issued directives to district revenue officers to furnish detail of Musharraf’s properties in their respective districts. 

Responding to observation of Justice Yahya Afridi that arrest warrants of the accused have been issued, Akram Sheikh submitted that the court has power to issue stricter orders than the arrest warrants.

The prosecutor alleged that Musharraf went abroad for three weeks for medical check-up, but now he is dancing in America and in no way appears to be ill.  He urged the bench to complete hearing over the objections petition during next hearing to which Justice Yahya Afridi said the bench shall hear all the objections of the prosecution.

An official of the interior ministry apprised the court that in response to correspondence to various departments regarding Musharraf’s properties, some had responded and some did not, adding that the ministry also came to know about two vehicles of Musharraf and his wife.

The court was informed that Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has not provided details of Musharraf’s properties to which Justice Afridi issued directives to the Interior Ministry official to come up with all the details during next hearing. The court directed all the parties in the matter to file required documents a week before the next hearing and adjourned the matter until May 05.