کہیں ایک اور " بھٹو " تو " ان دی میکنگ " نہیں ؟

کہیں ایک اور " بھٹو " تو " ان دی میکنگ " نہیں ؟ بلاول بھٹو کے ایک بیان نے ایسا جکڑا ، ایسا پکڑا کے بلاول کے نا نا شہید ذوالفقار علی بھٹو یاد آ گئے . باباۓ قوم کے بعد اگر کسی کو خوبصورت جملہ بولنا آتا تھا ، علامتی گفتگو کا ہنر اور سلیقہ تھا تو وہ صرف اور صرف بھٹو صاحب کو ہی تھے ، جن کی تقریریں ، بیانات اور پریس کانفرنسیں نثری نظموں کا سا لطف دیتی تھیں ، باقی تو گامے ماجے ہی تھے . بلاول کے اس تازہ بیان میں پہلی بار بھٹو کی سی چمک اور کھنک محسوس ہوئی ہے ، کوئی اتفاق کرے نہ کرے .....حسن بیان سے انکار ممکن نہیں - بلاول نے کہا " پنجابی سیاستدانوں کو بچانے کیلئے اردو الفاظ کے معنی تبدیل کئیے جاتے رہے تو میرے لئے بہتر اردو سیکھنا مشکل ہو جاۓ گا " کہیں ایک اور " بھٹو " تو " ان دی میکنگ " نہیں ؟ - حسن نثار

ZA Bhutto case: PPP gears up for ‘retrial of the century

ZAB reference case: Cabinet approves legal questions for ‘trial of the century’
Published: April 21, 2011
ZA Bhutto during his days of incarceration under the reign of Gen Ziaul Haq. PHOTO COURTESY: PPPUSA.ORG
ISLAMABAD:
The federal cabinet approved a set of five questions of law that the government will submit to the Supreme Court for its opinion in the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto reference case filed by President Asif Ali Zardari.

Information Minister Firdous Ashiq Awan told the media on Wednesday that the questions would now be part of the reference filed by President Zardari under Article 168 of the constitution. The apex court, during the hearing of the reference, had asked the government’s counsel, former law minister Babar Awan, to frame specific questions on which the president wanted to seek the court’s opinion.

Awan will be submitting the set of questions before the court today (Thursday) when it will resume the hearing.

The information minister said that the cabinet had invited Babar Awan in its special meeting so he could brief it on the legal and constitutional aspects of the reference as well as the proceedings before the Supreme Court. Awan informed the cabinet that the Supreme Court’s proceedings were progressing satisfactorily.

The objective of the reference, the counsel said, was to correct for the statutes and legal history what he – and the president – view as an error in judgment because a “judicial murder” of the chairman of a premier political party and founder of the country’s constitution had been committed.

The information minister said that Babar Awan had also highlighted the international significance and history of such high profile cases before the Cabinet.

She said that it was the objective of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) to get the superior judiciary to undo the wrong that Bhutto had been subjected to.

As far as the political victimisation of the PPP is concerned, the masses have made up for it by voting the PPP back into power time and again, she added.



Published in The Express Tribune, April 21st, 2011.


===

Govt adamant on change of lawyer in NRO case, SC told
Govt adamant on change of lawyer in NRO case, SC told The attorney general says, government did not budge from its point despite best efforts.




The federal government has stuck to its point on the replacement of lawyer in the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) review case. In his statement in the court, the attorney general of Pakistan submitted that despite his best efforts, the federal government did not budge from its stance. The proceeding has been adjourned for two weeks.



Earlier on Monday, a 17-member bench of the Supreme Court took up the review petition on the NRO. As the hearing started, former advocate-on-record Raja Abdul Ghafoor told the court that the Federal Law Ministry had stopped him from pleading the case.



Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry remarked that on one occasion the government lawyer is changed and on the other, the advocate-on-record. If the federal government has no confidence in the attorney general, additional attorney general or Kamal Azfar, then who else there it trusts in, the CJP remarked.



The CJP said that in the absence of a government lawyer and advocate-on-record, the matter of NRO review could be finished.




===
By Rauf Klasra
Published: April 13, 2011
ZA Bhutto during his days of incarceration under the reign of Gen Ziaul Haq. PHOTO COURTESY: PPPUSA.ORG
ISLAMABAD:
As the country braces for what could be a tumultuous reopening of one of the darkest chapters of its history, the government has appointed Law Minister Dr Babar Awan as the lawyer for Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s retrial case which starts today (Wednesday) in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

An expressive Awan pledged that he will quit from his ministerial post if it becomes a hurdle in the way of his pleading the case, which he dubbed the “(re)trial of the century”. Receiving written orders from the authorities, Awan was on Tuesday officially notified by the law ministry as the legal representative to appear before the apex court today.

President Asif Ali Zardari had sent a reference last week seeking the retrial of the ZA Bhutto case, which culminated in a long-debated guilty verdict over three decades ago – ultimately resulting in the hanging of the country’s first elected prime minister in 1979. The presidential reference contended that the late party chairman was not given justice and that the courts today should correct this.

The Pakistan Peoples Party government is throwing its entire political weight behind the case, and is set to pull all stops to demonstrate how important the matter is to them.

Awan is to be assisted by the attorney general and deputy attorney generals, secretary law Masood Chisti and a number of other lawyers.

In a late-night meeting at the Prime Minister House, it was also decided that a total of 60 high-level leaders will accompany the law minister to the Supreme Court building. The leaders will include federal ministers as well as representatives from the Senate, National Assembly, the four provincial assemblies and Gilgit-Baltistan.

The contingent of 60 leaders will gather for breakfast at the Parliament House on Wednesday morning, from where they are to march towards the Supreme Court building. For this purpose, the leaders have already arrived in Islamabad. Those that are expected to turn up for proceedings of the case will include Chairman Senate Farooq Naik, Speaker National Assembly Dr Fehmida Mirza, Chief Minister Sindh Qaim Ali Shah, Chief Minister Balochistan Lashkar Raisani and Speaker Sindh Assembly Nisar Khuhro.

Talking to The Express Tribune, Law Minister Dr Babar Awan confirmed his appointment as lawyer in the ZA Bhutto case. “Yes, I have been conveyed this officially, and will file the papers [to this effect] in the court on Wednesday”.

When questioned how he could fight the case as the serving law minister, Awan replied that he would inform honourable judges that the president, who had sent the reference, had now appointed him, but added that, if anyone raised objections, he would immediately tender his resignation from his post.

“For me, it’s a great honour to be the lawyer of ZAB in his retrial [as compared to] staying a federal minister, because it’s the trial of the century”, said Awan emphatically. He recalled that ZA Bhutto’s daughter, the late prime minister Benazir, had once said to him that the case’s verdict might have been different if he (Awan) had contested it.

“You don’t just defend your client, you actually wage war for his or her right in the courtroom”, Awan quoted Benazir as telling him during one of her case hearings in the mid ’90s.

Sources privy to the consultations in the lead-up to the case said that there was plenty of discussion on who should be sent to the court to fight the case, which is being given tremendous importance by the ruling party. The top leaders, including the president, are said to have chosen the name of the law minister Awan – who had actually penned the presidential reference.

“Whether the ZAB case should be reopened or revisited – this is the question which will be raised in the Courtroom No 1 today,” said a senior lawyer.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is to take up the case. Justice Muhammad Sair Ali and Justice Ghulam Rabbani are the other members of the bench.

Law Ministry sources told The Express Tribune that the government legal team is likely to point out the statement of Justice (retd) Nasim Hassan Shah, who reportedly confessed that there was immense pressure on judges who awarded death penalty to ZAB.

(With additional input by Zahid Gishkori)


Published in The Express Tribune, April 13th, 2011.

====

ZA Bhutto reference: President has not asked a specific question, says CJ
By Qaiser Zulfiqar
Published: April 15, 2011
PPP leaders Babar Awan, Qamar Zaman Kaira and Raja Parvez Ashraf speak to journalists after the case hearing. PHOTO: INP
ISLAMABAD:
President Asif Ali Zardari has not framed a specific legal question in his reference to the Supreme Court requesting a re-examination of the death sentence against former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, said Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on Thursday.

At a preliminary hearing to review the three-decade-old case, the chief justice pointed out that there were three separate court decisions against the former prime minister and President Zardari has not specified which one he would like to have re-examined.

“No one can deny the importance of the case but the question of law is very important,” said the chief justice.

Article 186 of the constitution authorises the president to refer any legal matter to the Supreme Court for its opinion, obliging the apex court to respond. The chief justice acknowledged the court’s constitutional responsibility during the course of the day’s hearings.

Meanwhile, former law minister Babar Awan sought permission to present arguments on behalf of the president after informing the court that the Pakistan Bar Council had renewed his licence to practice law and that he had tendered his resignation from the cabinet, which the acting president had accepted. The court had earlier objected to a cabinet minister appearing on behalf of the federation in the case, saying that it was against the law for him to do so.

Awan accepted that the question was not framed correctly. He then proceeded to argue that former chief justice Syed Naseem Hasan Shah, then a justice on the apex court, admitted in his autobiography – titled “Memoirs and Reflections” – that the verdict against former Prime Minister Bhutto was delivered under pressure from then-President General Muhammad Ziaul Haq.

Awan also cited evidence from two other books, including Bhutto’s own “If I am assassinated”.

The chief justice suggested books of his own, recommending “The Leopard and the Fox” by Tariq Ali.

Justice Sair Ali asked Awan whether the advice of the prime minster was sought on the specific question of the law. Awan replied that the whole cabinet was given a briefing before filing the reference and it was unanimously decided to file the reference and it was later sent to the prime minster for endorsement.

The chief justice asked Awan to read the summary sent to the prime minister and observed that no question of law was placed before him.

The court then adjourned further hearings on the case till April 18, asking Awan to take the time to frame an acceptable legal question for the court to consider.


Published in The Express Tribune, April 15th, 2011.

‘Bhutto and I’

The News talks to Hafeez Lakho, lawyer of ZA Bhutto,who recalls the Quaid-e-Awam’s last days

Saturday, April 04, 2009
By Imtiaz Ali

Karachi

Along with Ghulam Ali Memon and Yahya Bakhtiar, Abdul Hafeez Lakho, was among

three prominent lawyers on the defence team of the case

against the former premier Z.A. Bhutto.

Lakho spent long hours holding meetings with the founder leader of the Pakistan People’s Party during his last days, and in this interview with The News on Bhutto’s death anniversary, he talks about the case, his long association with Bhutto and how the legal events leading up to his hanging had been manipulated by the executive.



Bhutto and I

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and I had been together since 1953 when I was General Secretary of the Sindh Youth Front. After Bhutto Sahib returned from abroad, he replaced Sheikh Anwar’s position as president.

We were together during the struggle against the formation of the One-Unit, and when he became Chief Martial Law Administrator and President, we reminded him of part he had played against the One-Unit.

Bhutto, however, said he had to consult his associates, and we parted ways for nearly three years.

But we got together again after the dissolution of the One-Unit. The late Ghulam Ali Memon was appointed as Advocate General Sindh, and I as Additional Advocate General of Sindh.

After General Zia-ul-Haq imposed martial law in the country, all the law officers appointed by the government of Prime Minister Bhutto decided to quit in protest, but as General Zia had promised to hold election within 90 days, the other AGs and I were asked not to resign during the interim period. However, I resigned.

Meanwhile, the case against Bhutto Sahib had already started at Lahore, and his defence team had been formed. When he was convicted by the Lahore High Court and imprisoned in the Rawalpindi jail, Mr Bhutto sent me a message through Ghulam Ali Memon to come and see him. He asked me to join the team of lawyers to defend him in the Supreme Court (SC). I readily agreed.

And so, on April 4, (just a year before Bhutto was hanged), I left Karachi and went to Islamabad to start work on the case.

Last efforts to save Bhutto’s life: The case

After the first judgment, we filed a review application before the SC, only to have it dismissed. I must mention here that Justice Durab Patel had subsequently said that they signed the judgment of review as they were assured by late Anwarul Haq (the then Chief Justice of Pakistan) that in case the whole SC requested that his (Bhutto) case may be considered for lesser punishment, that is not death. Justice Anwar was assured that recommendations of the SC would be accepted.

But none of this happened, and we had every reason to believe that in spite of international pressure, a person like Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was going to be hanged.

In consultation with Yahya Bakhtiar and Mr Sharif of Mirpurkhas, I prepared a second review petition which was duly signed by the late Yahya Bakhtiar. It was given to me as an “Amanat.” I was to file the petition as soon as Bakhtiar told me to do so.

Yahya Sahib finally called me on the evening of April 2 and told me to present the petition to the SC bench in Karachi. I immediately contacted my advocate on record (AOR), but he refused to sign the petition on the grounds that SC rules had been amended. According to him, he was forbidden to sign our second review petition, and said that he would lose his job if he did.

Without the signature of an AOR, no document can be presented in the SC, so I immediately contacted Mr Siddiqi, our second AOR in Islamabad, who readily agreed to come to Karachi and sign the petition.

Mr Siddiqi came in on the morning of April 3. The team, myself, Mr Siddiqi, and my other colleagues including Raza Rabbani (former federal minister who resigned recently) and barrister Saleem and his wife, (the couple was not enrolled as SC lawyers, but helped us prepare the case) all went to the Sindh High Court (SHC) building, where the SC bench was located.

But this time, the Deputy Registrar of the court refused to receive the petition, so I got the intervention of Justice Mohammed Haleem (former Chief Justice of Pakistan who had given a dissenting judgment in the Bhutto case). At that time, he was a senior SC judge in Karachi. We waited outside to be called in, but at about 1:00 p.m., Justice Haleem’s peon locked the chamber and informed us that he had already left.

We rushed to his house, where he was offering his Zuhr prayers, but when he met with us, he told us he was unable to do anything. In the meantime, Justice Dorab Patel had come to Karachi from Quetta. Justice Patel was senior to Justice Haleem, and by then was the only one who could entertain the matter.

So at 3:30 that afternoon, we visited his house near Frere Hall. His clerk wanted to know why I had come, and when I told him the reason and that it was urgent, he returned with a message saying I should present the appeal in court the next day.

I told the clerk that it would be too late and also informed Yahya Bakhtiar, who asked me to rush to Islamabad and present the petition at the main seat where Ghulam Safdar Shah was in Islamabad as the judge in charge.

This may surprise you, but I was so confused that when I left home for the airport, I forgot to take along my briefcase which had all the files. I realised it only when after I had already crossed the security barrier and could not come back. But the security staff was very cooperative. They and the PIA staff gave me 15 minutes time to get my bag and said they would try to make sure the plane didn’t leave without me. I rang up my home and my neighbour Colonel Aziz - at one time a prisoner of war in East Bengal, who was released by Z.A.

Bhutto’s efforts ñ who then reached the airport in 10 minutes and handed me briefcase.

Back in Islamabad, I stayed in the same hotel I had been staying for entire year, but the next morning on April 4 just as I was about to leave for the court, Ayub, the Bera who had served me for a whole year, came in crying and carrying an Urdu newspaper (Nawa-i-Waqt) containing news of the death of Mr Bhutto. I immediately contacted Yahya Sahib at Quetta, who said I could go back to Karachi.



Predetermined judgment

It was a predetermined judgment. This was the first time that a judgment had turned into judicial murder. From day one, we had known the fate of our appeal. Shaheed Bhutto had already said that the people may be able to get him released but also said that we lawyers should continue do our duty. There may be judgments that can carry doubt, but this is the only judgment where murder appears to be apparent.

We had raised “good grounds” in our first appeal, but since our second review would have further exposed the blunders committed and been taken up again by the international media, the SC’s rules were amended to avoid such an embarrassment.



Benazir Bhutto sends a message through “shopkeeper” woman

The time of Bhutto’s death, or rather, his Shahadat, was probably fixed in the early hours of March 1, (just over a month before he was hanged). We received a message from Shaheed Benazir Bhutto that both she and Begum Nusrat had been asked to visit the jail for their last meeting. BB was not feeling well and excused herself, but was warned that it would be her last opportunity.

Through a woman who runs a small make-shift shop near the Rest House where the two ladies were kept under confinement, BB then sent word to a friend in Islamabad about it, who then passed it on it to a friend in Karachi and Yahya Sahib. That is how we tried our second appeal for filing a review. I handed over the original copy of the second review to BB for safe custody and future record.

Dissenting judgment

While judges were given understanding that their orders or instructions would not be carried, the Registrar of the SC would not convey the same. Justice Waheedudin (member of the SC bench) had said on record that since he was not well at the time, he had passed a dissenting judgment from his bed.

I, meanwhile, was told in Islamabad that he (Justice Waheedudin) was ready to pronounce his dissenting judgment in public and face the consequences.

I went to visit Justice Waheedudin at his house, along with both local and foreign journalists, but his son Mr Wajihuddin (former SC judge) told us that his father was not feeling well and he would not meet with the media.

The significance of Waheedudin’s dissenting judgment is that it would have raised the judgment to 4-4, meaning that there were an equal number of the SC bench members both in favour of and against Bhutto.

In that case, Bhutto would have been given the “benefit of doubt”.

Originally, it had been a nine-member bench, but one of the judges had retired. We requested that the government give him (the retired judge) an extension for this case on the grounds Justuce Waheedudin had also received an extension, but our written application was rejected. Had it been otherwise, five judges out of nine would have passed a judgment in favour of Mr Bhutto.



The longest meetings (Katchehris)

Out of all the advocates on the team, I was the one who’d had the longest meetings with Bhutto. Whenever the court was closed for a week or more during a holiday, everybody went back home, but Mr Bhutto had said that I should remain with him to visit him in jail everyday. This to the extent that when I left Islamabad on the night before Eid, I offered my Eid prayers in Karachi and returned to Islamabad the same evening, just so I could meet Mr Bhutto.

A brave man

When I knew that meetings of advocates would be stopped after the judgment in the first review petition, Bhutto Sahib would want to ask about all the rules. I went through the relevant rules concerning preparations for hanging, and when I met him that evening, he asked me things like whether the jail authority would allow him to retain “shaving safety” for shaving. I told him “They may even take away the cummerbund.”

When I was leaving, he said “Hafeez, you just behave as if this is not our last meeting. Leave me as you used to leave me. Just shake hands and go. Do not look back and do not show your tears to the people who are watching us.” He was a brave man.



Vivid memories

There was one occasion that people may not know about, or that those who do know about it are no longer with us. The SHC Bar Association was holding its annual dinner at the SHC premises. I was a member of the managing committee at that time and the late Sharaf Faridi was president of the association. Security staff (government agencies) asked us to provide a complete list of our guests, including all advocates who would be attending the dinner, but we refused. We informed Yahya Bakhtiar, and he said we had done the right thing.

The security people told Prime Minister Bhutto, that they have not cleared his visit to the dinner. They asked him to cancel the dinner.

Bhutto Sahib contacted Yahya Sahib and told him his predicament.

“I have invited friends as Attorney General,” Yahya Sahib told him. “I will have to go whether you come or not as there would be guests coming from outside the country as well.” He asked all of us to continue to prepare for the function and not to think that it would be cancelled.

About half an hour before the function was scheduled to begin Yahya Bakhtiar was informed by his wife that she had received a message from the Prime Minister House saying that he (Bhutto) had decided to attend the function with or without security. Bhutto Sahib did not succumb to pressure of the security personnel.

After dinner, the security personnel informed us that their persons had taken care of security as all the tables near main table where Bhutto was sitting had one or two security personnel sitting close by.

When we asked how they could say this with all the front tables occupied by advocates or judges, they told us that their “trusted” persons were among them.