Dawn : SC issues notices to AG, respondents in petitions against Musharraf’s re-election bid

SC issues notices to AG, respondents in petitions against Musharraf’s re-election bid

APP | October 3, 2007

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court Wednesday issued notices to Attorney General and other respondents in constitutional petitions filed under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution against President General Pervez Musharraf’s re-election bid.

An eight-member bench issued the notices after hearing arguments of the counsels of all the three petitioners.

The bench headed by Justice Javed Iqbal included Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, Justice Mohammad Nawaz Abbasi, Justice Faqir Mohammad Khokhar, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice S yed Jamshed Ali Shah and Justice Ghulam Mohammad Rabbani.

The respondents include the Chief Election Commissioner and the Federation, besides others.

It adjourned the hearing of the petitions till Thursday.

Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry had originally constituted a nine-member bench, but Justice Sardar Mohammad Raza Khan withdrew because he had already given his opinion in a similar matter a few days ago.

The bench stopped the proceedings and referred the matter to the Chief Justice who reconstituted the bench excluding Justice Raza Khan.

The proceedings were then resumed.

Hours after the bench concluded the proceedings, the Chief Justice added two more judges to the panel, namely Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday and Justice Tassadduque Hussain Jillani, according to the court's public relations department.

During the sitting Wednesday, the bench said that the petitions related to matter of public importance touching upon fundamental rights of citizens.

It said interpretation pertaining to Articles 41 (2), 41 (7), 62, 63 and 44 92) of the Constitution besides Presidential Election Rules 1988 are involved.

The three petitions have been filed by presidential candidates Justice (Retd) Wajihuddin Ahmed and Makhdoom Amin Fahim and Waseem Rehan.

Members of the bench raised a number of questions.

Justice Abbasi asked the counsels of the candidate petitioners about news reports that their clients were not serious in contesting the election.

Justice Dogar asked as to why existing parliament cannot exercise its powers regarding Presidential election.

“How you (Latif Khosa) can challenge the forthcoming elections when your clients are also contesting. Do you want the uniform to continue?” he further asked.

If forthcoming presidential elections are stayed then when this election will be due, Justice Khokhar and Justice Abbasi asked.

Hamid Khan said that amendment in Article 62 and 63 of the Constitution by the Election Commission is mala fide.

A uniformed candidate can not be equated with a civilian candidate, he said.

Objections were raised before the Election Commission of Pakistan over nomination papers of Musharraf which were rejected, he said.

Hamid Khan said that a military man was not eligible to contest election under Article 25 and 17 (2) of the constitution and nomination papers of General Musharraf should be rejected and forthcoming presidential election be stayed.

However, he accepted that some other remedial forums were available but due to short time his client approached the Supreme Court to avail remedial forum under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution.

He contended that General Musharraf had already completed his two terms and now only new assemblies could elect a new President because tenure of existing assemblies was due to expire on November 15.

Same assemblies cannot elect two presidents during their tenure, he added.

Justice Javed Iqbal observed, “I think there is no Article available in the constitution to meet this specific matter.”

Sardar Mohammad Latif Khosa appearing as counsel of Makhdoom Amin Fahim said, “I differ with Hamid Khan's view that some other forums are also available. At this stage only one forum is available which is the Supreme Court.”

If Supreme Court is the only forum then how a similar petition was filed in the Sindh High Court by a presidential candidate, Justice Khokhar asked.

The petitioner in that case also belongs to Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians, Justice Dogar said.

“Yes, but I am here on behalf of a person (Makhdoom Amin Fahim) not on behalf of the party,” Latif Khosa said.