High-treason case: Court to pass orders if Musharraf fails to appear

ISLAMABAD: The Special Court Thursday summoned former president General (R) Pervez Musharraf on May 2 in the high-treason case for imposing emergency rule on November 3, 2007. A three-member bench, headed by Justice Tahira Safdar, resumed hearing on the complaint lodged by former PML-N government seeking initiation of high-treason proceedings against Musharraf.

Musharraf’s counsel Salman Safdar and prosecution team members appeared before the court. Safdar told the judge that his client was ready to appear before the court on May 13; however, she directed that the accused should ensure his appearance before Ramazan.

Justice Tahira Safdar told the counsel that if the accused can come to the court on May 13 then he can also appear on May 2. “In case the accused does not come, the court will pass an appropriate order for recording his statement,” Justice Tahira said.

The court also directed provision of copies of questionnaire to the prosecution as well as the lawyer of the accused with the ruling that Musharraf was expected to answer the questions under Section 342 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

Salman Safdar told the court that his client did not want to impede the course of justice but he was suffering from multiple ailments requiring hospitalisation. The counsel said Musharraf was undergoing chemotherapy for the rare disease Cardiac Almydosis. He said his client was facing baseless charges and wished to return to record statement under Section 342 of CrPC.

He said the option to record statement through Skype was not appropriate, as documentary evidence could not be put to the accused through the video link. Earlier, Musharraf’s counsel submitted an application to the court under Section 265-K of CrPC seeking acquittal of his client.

He contended that the federal government had failed to follow the mandatory procedure for filing a complaint for the offence of high-treason against the applicant. He said the CrPC was integral to the Special Courts Act, 1976 which served as the special statute for the special court adding that the applicant was fully entitled to availing himself of the remedy of Section 265-K of CrPC.

The counsel submitted that the eight prosecution witnesses who had recorded their evidence against his client had failed to adduce any incriminating material. The counsel contended it was the duty of the prosecution to prove its case to the hilt. He prayed that the complaint be declared a nullity in the eyes of law, unlawful and void ab intitio. Furthermore, he prayed the court to quash the complaint and acquit the applicant before announcing the final judgment in the instant case.

Justice Tahira however asked the counsel to file the instant application with the court registrar in accordance with the law. Seeking assistance, Justice Tahira asked the prosecution for other options for the court if an accused did not appear before the court.

The prosecution lawyer replied that in case of absence of the accused before the court, his lawyer could appear. Justice Tahira however inquired if the counsel for the suspect also declined to appear before the court then what could be done. The prosecution submitted that in such situation the court could appoint a lawyer as enshrined under Section 9 of Special Court Rules. The court directed Musharraf to appear before it on May 2 and adjourned further hearing.