ISLAMABAD – The Government on Monday submitted its reply, through its counsel Barrister Kamal Azfar, in the Supreme Court seeking review of the apex court’s verdict on National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO).
“It would be now a futile exercise to contact the Swiss authorities in respect of the proceedings knowing fully that they cannot be revived through such a request,” the Federation told the court.
Besides 300-page documents pertaining details about Swiss cases, in its concise reply of some 19 pages, which are full of spelling and English grammar mistakes, the Government has claimed more than 20 times that Swiss cases had been closed on merit by the Prosecutor General, Geneva, vide order dated August 25, 2008. Similarly, more than 10 times the Federation recalled that the apex court did err to declare the NRO as void ab initio insisting that it was a valid law.
It is relevant to mention here that a major part of the FederationÂ’s reply consists of different ministersÂ’ press statements and Law Minister Babar AwanÂ’s arguments that he delivered before a five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court that there was no case but only an investigation was underway in the Switzerland against President Asif Ali Zardari.
It further said, “The NRO was a validly made law under the process laid down under Article 89 of the Constitution. It cannot be said to be result of a deal between the PPP and General Pervez Musharraf or two individuals. The NRO did achieve its objectives, as per its preamble it allowed a smooth transition to democracy from military rule. It directly led President Musharraf to shed his military uniform and enable the return of the main political leaders, besides allowing free and fair elections to take place in the country in February 2008.”
The concise statement further held, “In ordering the Federal Government to revive and reopen cases in a country outside Pakistan, this august court’s jurisdiction indirectly, if not directly, is exercised beyond the territory of Pakistan.”
The Government recalled in its reply that the Supreme Court did not consider the implications of the order dated 25-08-2008 on merit. The laws of Switzerland provides inter alia that according to Article-5, Extinction of Penal Clause, a request shall not be granted if, (a), “In Switzerland or in the State where the offence was committed the judge acquitted the Defendant or discontinued the proceedings on material reasons.” It further pointed out that the same principle has been applied by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Mumtaz Ali Shah V/s Chairman PTCL reported in PLD 2007 SC 1060.
The concise statement raised an objection that the NRO ceased to exist on 31st July 2009 while there was no NRO rule when Dr Mubashar HassanÂ’s petition was heard.
APP adds: The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned hearing till Wednesday a set of pleas seeking review of its National Reconciliation Ordinance verdict.
Salman Raja, counsel for the main petitioner Dr Mubashir Hassan, upon whose plea against NRO, a larger bench had given its ruling, appeared and requested that hearing be deferred as his father was undergoing a surgery.
The FederationÂ’s plea sought explanation of certain aspects of detailed verdict of apex court on NRO.