ISLAMABAD: In a presidential reference pertaining to the death sentence given to former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa stated on Monday that the Supreme Court is currently considering one person’s honor and trying to correct history “as it wants to set a better example”. During the presidential reference hearing, the CJP stated that it was reviewing the death sentence given to the founder of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). The larger bench of the supreme court, which is presided over by Chief Justice Isa and consists of Justices Sardar Tariq Masood, Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Yahya Afridi, Amin-ud-din Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, and Musarrat Hilali, began hearing arguments on the case. On April 4, 1979, Bhutto was executed by hanging in the Rawalpindi district jail in connection with a murder case. But his party referred to Bhutto’s execution as “judicial murder.” On April 2, 2011, by means of a presidential reference under Article 186 of the Constitution, former president Asif Ali Zardari petitioned the Supreme Court to request its judgment regarding a reexamination of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) founder’s prosecution. On December 12, 2023, during the prior hearing, Justice Mansoor questioned the presidential reference. The SC judge asked for help in resolving the legal issues, noting that the court had already rejected the appeal against its decision, which had also reached finality. “More appeals in this case cannot be heard by the Supreme Court.
Also read: Five policemen deployed for polio duty martyred in Bajaur blast
How is it possible? CJP Isa asked, “Are you an amicus curiae?” In response, Rabbani stated that he was representing Sanam, Bakhtawar, and Asifa Bhutto in the legal matter and that he had filed a petition to join the lawsuit as a party. Zahid Ibrahim, meanwhile, declared that he was speaking on behalf of Fatima and Zulfikar Bhutto Jr. Amicus curiae The chief justice had requested the interview transcript in the same case, Makhdoom Ali Khan said as he started his argument. Justice Mazhar then stated that the interview with Justice (retd) Naseem Hasan Shah, a former judge, served as the basis for this reference. According to Justice Shah, the Supreme Court cannot make a decision on a case by merely observing an interview. “The court’s opinion is limited to matters of law.” Makhdoom responded by saying that the issue is not with Bhutto’s execution but rather with the stain on his reputation. “Later, one of the judges said in an interview that he gave the verdict under pressure,” he stated. Following this, the court aired Justice (retd) Shah’s interview. According to Justice Shah, just one judge participated in the interview process; the other judges on the bench stayed silent. The only thing that matters, Justice Shah said, is that the court was not independent at the time. Justice Afridi went on to say that it was not possible to determine that the judiciary was not independent at the time based just on one interview. “There were other judges who wrote their notes and dissented,” he stated.
