SC to resume hearing of Gilani contempt case today

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) will resume contempt of court proceedings against Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani Monday, Geo News reported.

A seven-member bench of apex court headed by Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk and comprising Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan, Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Muhammad Ather Saeed would hear the suo moto notice taken against non compliance of court’s historical verdict against National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) promulgated by former dictator president Parvez Musharraf.

The Supreme Court on March 22 adjourned the hearing of contempt case against Prime Minister Gilani till today (March 26) and directed PM’s counsel to conclude his arguments till 1:00 AM today.

While the Supreme Court is all set to hear the prime minister’s contempt case, PM’s counsel Aitzaz Ahsan will have to respond to three crucial and critical questions in Courtroom No 4 today to escape the web in which he has entangled himself badly.

These three vital questions include ‘true intention of those who framed the Constitution’, ‘statement of the attorney general that prime minister was properly informed by him’ and ‘how the immunity of one person could become a hurdle in writing of letters when there are so many accused persons in all cases’.

Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan has stated before the court while arguing that under Article 10-A of the Constitution that the seven-member bench became disqualified after issuing contempt notice and charge sheeting his client as ‘fair trial’ and ‘due process’ guaranteed as fundamental rights in the said article could not be ensured.

The major argument of Aitzaz was that Article 10-A was a revolutionary article and it was a must for the seven-member bench to look into the true intentions of the framers of the Constitution and what they had in their minds while making this article as part of the basic book.

“Their intention was to ensure fair trial and due process whereas by fair trial they mean every person should be given opportunity of being heard before any judgement and that no person could be a judge of his own cause,” Aitzaz had argued on Wednesday and Thursday.

However, top constitutional expert S M Zafar, who also happens to be the very mover of the said article, has disclosed that the basic intention in his mind and in the minds of his fellow committee members deliberating the 18th Amendment was to ensure a fair trial and due process for the civilians tried in military courts under the Army Act.

In a long hearing on Wednesday, Aitzaz Ahsan had ‘proved’ through documents available on record that the prime minister was unaware of the judgments in NRO and NRO implementation cases or its review petition till some certain dates and that the prime minister didn’t even read the newspapers covering historic judgments of the Supreme Court in major cases.

However, the Attorney General Maulvi Anwar-ul-Haq has come on record and has stated that after all the judgment he had himself properly informed the prime minister.

The third question which Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan is avoiding for so many days and changes the topic if judges ask it and loses his temper if journalists ask, is: when there are more than one accused person in all the foreign corruption and money laundering cases, around a dozen in the Swiss money laundering cases alone, how immunity in international law to one person could become basis of not writing letters to these foreign countries for the other accused.