Page 22 of 22 FirstFirst ... 12171819202122
Results 421 to 434 of 434

Thread: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

Share             
  1. #421
    Senior Member Felix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    5,517
    Thanks
    2606
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Quote Originally Posted by Amjad Hussain View Post
    Ghazi murder case: non-bailable arrest warrant issued for Musharraf

    ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday issued a non-bailable arrest against former president Pervez Musharraf in the Ghazi Abdul Rashid case.

    District and Session Judge Kamran Busharat Mufti also rejected Musharraf’s plea to be exempted from appearing in court.

    Read: IHC issues non-bailable arrest warrant for Musharraf

    The court also stated that if Musharraf fails to appear before court, police will escort him and bring him to court on July 24.

    The case

    On September 2, 2013, a case was registered in the Islamabad High Court (IHC) against Musharraf for the murder of the former cleric and his mother during the Lal Masjid operation.

    Read: Case registered against Musharraf

    The case was filed after Haroon Rasheed, the son of Ghazi, submitted an application at the Aabpara police station for the registration of an FIR against the former president for involvement in the death of Haroon’s father and grandmother.

    In the application, Rasheed had referred to about 20 pages of the Lal Masjid Commission report, which hold the former president responsible for the operation.

    Earlier, the IHC had stopped Station House Officer (SHO) Aabpara Police Station, Qasim Niazi from leaving the courtroom, saying that he would not be allowed to leave until a case was registered against Musharraf.

    Police had earlier refused a request by leaders of the Red Mosque to name General Musharraf as a suspect in the case of a military raid in 2007 which saw dozens killed including one of the administrators.
    Here they go again. They will not drop the vendetta.

  2. #422
    Senior Member Hope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,856
    Thanks
    3799
    Pakistan United Arab Emirates

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Quote Originally Posted by Felix View Post
    Here they go again. They will not drop the vendetta.
    Because there is an effort to clean Karachi up, Mush gets a finger? So predictable.

  3. #423
    Senior Member Pak92's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,841
    Thanks
    1636
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Of course in Pakistan vendettas and vindictiveness comes at a premium. As if Pakistan has no other worries than to keep bringing this up. Petty has to be the word

  4. #424
    Think Tank Muse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    11,034
    Thanks
    5084
    UK UK

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Quote Originally Posted by Pak92 View Post
    Of course in Pakistan vendettas and vindictiveness comes at a premium. As if Pakistan has no other worries than to keep bringing this up. Petty has to be the word
    Pressure on Raheel and the institution he represents. PAKISTANI Politicians, not making party distinctions, generally are NOT pro armed forces, they see the armed forces as competition and if Raheel can be placed between a rock and hard place, ALL, including NS and company, will breathe easier.


    PPP has great respect for Gen Sharif, outburst was against ex-military dictators: Sherry Rehman
    Published: June 19, 2015


    ISLAMABAD:
    Days after former president Asif Zardari’s spoke allegedly against the military establishment, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) vice president Sherry Rehman sought to defend the party co-chairman’s statement, explaining that it was directed against past military dictators in the country, Express News reported.

    Peoples Party holds General Raheel Sharif in high esteem, and lauds his role,” she said while talking to media after an Iftar hosted by Zardari in Islamabad on Friday.

    We are talking about former military dictators who’ve assumed power and are trying to return to the political front.

    Rehman recounted how the PPP always faced military dictators in the past.

    Former information minister and senior PPP leader Qamar Zaman Kaira too backed Zardari, saying the speech reflected the thoughts of every party member.

    He added that all parties were supporting the ongoing security operation in Karachi, including Zardari. Kaira added that they did not defend corruption.

    Zardari on Tuesday said politicians were better suited to running the affairs of the country. “You are here for only three years,” he said in an apparent jab at the army chief.

    Addressing an oath-taking ceremony for PPP office-bearers from Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, Zardari said, “I know the art of war better than anyone else.”

    The PPP co-chairman expressed annoyance at the purported character-assassination campaign against him and his party. “It needs to stop! There is a limit to everything.”

    In response, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on Wednesday censured Zardari for his outburst against the army, saying the PPP co-chairman’s speech was unacceptable in times of war.

    Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan described the PPP co-chairman’s speech ‘inappropriate and insulting’.
    Last edited by Muse; 20th June 2015 at 01:33.

  5. #425
    Senior Member Wajid47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    5,491
    Thanks
    3118
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    nothing like a bit of back tracking PPP
    The Following User Says Thank You to Wajid47 For This Useful Post: Muse


  6. #426
    Senior Member Sinbad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    4,731
    Thanks
    2490
    Pakistan England

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Musharraf exempted from appearing in court

    ISLAMABAD: Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday set aside the non-bailable arrest warrants issued for the former president retired General Pervez Musharraf in the murder case of Lal Masjid cleric Abdul Rashid Ghazi.

    On June 19, acting District and Sessions Judge Kamran Basharat Mufti issued non-bailable arrest warrants, while rejecting his plea for exemption from appearing based on medical reasons.

    IHC Justice Aamir Farooq referred the matter back to the sessions judge to decide on the plea for exemption of Gen Musharraf, on the basis of a new medical report submitted by the counsel for former president.

    In the new medical report, the doctors once again advised the former military ruler not to travel outside Karachi.

    It may be mentioned that in April this year, a nine-member medical board had advised Gen Musharraf not to travel out of the port city.

    On July 7, IHC sought a fresh medical report from Gen Musharraf’s counsel after an initial hearing on the petition filed against the issuance of the arrest warrants.

    In the petition, Gen Musharraf’s counsel Malik Tahir Mahmood stated that the trial court did not adopt the right procedure as envisaged under the law and acted hastily in issuing the non-bailable warrants for his client.

    Decision was made in light of a new medical report
    Advocate Mahmood stated that Musharraf was in Karachi where a medical board constituted upon the directions of an anti-terrorism court in Quetta examined him and advised him not to travel due to certain conditions duly mentioned in the report. Subsequently, the court in Quetta exempted Gen Musharraf from appearance, he added.

    The report was presented before the special bench seized with the high treason trial of Gen Musharraf and the three members’ bench considered it.

    Even the ATC Islamabad considered the report and exempted the petitioner from personal appearance in the judges’ detention case, he added.

    Aabpara Police registered an FIR against Musharraf in 2013 for his alleged role in the murder of Ghazi and his mother, during the 2007 Lal Masjid operation.

    Published in Dawn, July 30th, 2015

  7. #427
    Senior Member Pak92's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,841
    Thanks
    1636
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Benazir murder case: Musharraf challenges Siegel's testimony in court



    RAWALPINDI: Former president Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf has challenged US lobbyist Mark Siegel's allegations that he had threatened the late Benazir Bhutto in a phone call made to her while she was planning to return to the country after an eight-year self-imposed exile.

    An Anti-Terrorism Court in Rawalpindi admitted for hearing on Wednesday a petition filed by Barrister Farogh Naseem on behalf of the former military stronman, which asked the court to declare Siegel's testimony unlawful.

    Musharraf said in the petition that the testimony was recorded in violation of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) as no judicial officer was present while Siegel testified.

    He also objected to Farooq H. Naek sitting next to Siegel as his advocate while he testified.

    The petition maintained that Siegel's testimony lacked transparency and did not meet the requirements of the CrPC.

    After accepting the petition for hearing, the court deferred Siegel's cross-examination by Musharraf’s counsel via video link — which was scheduled for 7:30pm today.

    Know more: Siegel available next month, ATC told

    While also issuing a notice to Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) prosecutor, ATC adjourned the hearing till Nov 11.

    Siegel had recorded his statement before an ATC on Oct 1, where he had connected Gen Musharraf with Ms Bhutto’s murder on the basis that the former military ruler, despite imminent threats to her life, deliberately deprived Bhutto of the security detail, which she deserved being a former prime minister.

    In his statement, the lobbyist had claimed that PPP sought permission from Gen Musharraf to bring foreign security personnel with Bhutto and asked for vehicles with tinted glass, but both requests were rejected.

    Musharraf had earlier rejected Siegel's allegations, terming his testimony ‘despicable’.

    “I strongly and unequivocally reject the claim of Mark Siegel, a close adviser, paid lobbyist and co-author of the last book of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto," he had said in a statement.

    “I am shocked and amazed at Mr Siegel’s assertion that I made a threatening phone call to Ms Bhutto. This claim is entirely false, fictitious and appears to be wilfully fabricated.”

    Mark Siegel is the fourth prosecution witness against Gen Musharraf. Two witnesses, former interior secretary Kamal Shah and the former National Crisis Management Cell director general did not support the prosecution’s case. The third witness, former Intelligence Bureau director general Ejaz Shah, was dropped by the prosecution.

  8. #428
    Senior Member Pak92's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,841
    Thanks
    1636
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Decision in Musharraf treason case ‘win-win’ for all sides?

    ISLAMABAD: It may be a ‘win-win’ situation for all the stakeholders in the high treason case viz-a-viz the complainant, the main accused and the co-accused, as the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has asked the federal government to reinvestigate the case.

    The IHC also set aside the special court order passed on Nov 21, 2014, asking the federal government to include former prime minister Shaukat Aziz, former chief justice of Pakistan Abdul Hameed Dogar and ex-federal minister Zahid Hamid as abettors of Pervez Musharraf in the case.

    All the parties – the three ‘co-accused’, the main accused Gen Musharraf as well as the complainant, the federal government, – were not happy with the judgment for different reasons.

    Gen Musharraf wanted to drag more abettors into the treason case as he filed an application with the special court seized with the high treason case, saying he imposed the Nov 3, 2007, emergency after consulting the civilian and military leadership, including the then services chiefs, corps commanders.

    The three co-accused were ‘aggrieved’ of the special court order for including them in the case. They also wanted certain observations passed against them expunged.

    Special court order reopens investigation, charges levelled by JIT said to be unaffected by fresh ruling
    The federal government was also unhappy as the special court not only raised questions on the transparency of the treason case investigation but also used the word “selective investigation” in its Nov 21 judgment.

    The matter, however, was solved ‘amicably’ and with the mutual consent of all the parties as the IHC quoting the federal government proposal for settlement of the matter decided the case. The government in May this year had expressed the willingness to probe the “role of any person as aider or abettor” in the treason case.

    The court order stated: “On receiving of such statement (of the federal government) all the learned counsel appearing by either parties shown their willingness for investigation of the case at large.”

    The order added: “Mr. Farogh Nasim (counsel of Gen Musharraf) at this stage stated that in case observations made by the court are expunged, then there would be nothing against them and they might take undue advantage thereof during the investigation.”

    Subsequently, the court observed that “all the accused or prosecution witnesses were supposed to be examined as required by law and their viewpoint be also recorded. Also they be allowed to place material in their defence during investigation.”

    Additional Attorney General Afnan Karim Kundi, who represented the federal government, told Dawn that the court order was clear and the investigation agency would probe the role of (any) aider and abettor who allegedly facilitated the imposition of the emergency.

    A senior law officer of the federal government on the condition of anonymity said though the order had seemingly reopened the investigation, the complaint of the federal government against Gen Musharraf based on the earlier investigation report by JIT remained pending and not affected in any manner.

    That’s why, he added, the IHC had left it to the special court seized with the high treason trial to fix the period of “reinvestigation” acknowledging that the complaint remained pending before the special court.

    Advocate Faisal Hussain, a counsel for Gen Musharraf, on the other hand, said the special court may not proceed against his client as the IHC had declared the investigation conducted by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) as ‘flawed’.

    Though the special court is likely to take up the treason case on November 27, Mr Hussain was of the view that the court may not proceed as the investigation was still inconclusive and the IHC did not pass any order for the recommencement of the stalled trial of Gen Musharraf.

    Earlier, former PML-N federal minister Zahid Hamid told Dawn that he was not against the reinvestigation in the treason case but had certain reservations over the special court’s observations passed against him in the Nov 21 order.

    If the observations are not set aside, the investigation officer would take them as a guideline hence the reinvestigation would not be independent and transparent, he added.

    Published in Dawn, November 11th, 2015

  9. #429
    Member Latif's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    569
    Thanks
    194
    Pakistan Bahrain

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Time to release him and end the witch hunt.

  10. #430
    Senior Member Jameel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    3,802
    Thanks
    1714
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Musharraf’s objections against Siegel’s testimony rejected

    ISLAMABAD: An anti-terrorism court (ATC) in Rawalpindi on Monday dismissed objections raised by former president Pervez Musharraf against the testimony of US lobbyist Mark Siegel recorded through a video link in the Benazir Bhutto murder case.

    On November 4, the former military ruler had filed an application through his counsel Barrister Farogh Nasim, challenging the legality of Mr Siegel’s testimony.

    However, after hearing the arguments of Musharraf’s counsel and the special public prosecutor, ATC judge Rai Mohammad Ayub Khan Marth dismissed the application.

    Arguing before the court, Barrister Nasim said the testimony was recorded in violation of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) as no judicial officer was present while Mr Siegel testified.

    He said the testimony lacked transparency and did not meet the requirements of the CrPC.

    Barrister Nasim requested the court to direct Mr Siegel to appear in-person before the ATC to record his statement again.

    Special public prosecutor Khawaja Imtiaz, however, maintained that the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) not only allowed the testimony of any witness through a video link but also permitted the ATC to conduct the entire trial proceeding through video conferencing.

    He recalled that on June 22 this year, the ATC had rejected an application filed by Gen Musharraf against the legality of recording the testimony through a video link after which the court issued summons to Mr Siegel.

    Technically, the accused (Gen Musharraf) could file an appeal with Lahore High Court (LHC) as the matter of video link testimony had already been decided by the ATC.

    He said due to security concerns, the US lobbyist had refused to come to Pakistan to record his statement.

    Talking to Dawn, prosecutor Imtiaz said Mr Siegel was ready to be cross-examined but it was deferred as Gen Musharraf challenged his statement.

    He said after the ATC order, Mr Siegel would be contacted again through the Pakistan embassy in Washington for his cross-examination.

    Mr Siegel had recorded his statement with the ATC on Oct 1 through a video link from New York and connected Gen Musharraf with Ms Bhutto’s murder. He said despite imminent threats to her life, the former military ruler deliberately did not provide a security detail to Ms Bhutto which she deserved as a former prime minister.

    The lobbyist claimed that the PPP had sought permission from Gen Musharraf to bring foreign security personnel with Ms Bhutto and asked for vehicles with tinted glasses but both the requests were rejected.

    Musharraf had earlier rejected Mr Siegel’s allegations and termed his testimony ‘despicable.’

    Mr Siegel is the fourth prosecution witness against Gen Musharraf in the murder case. Former secretary interior Kamal Shah and ex-National Crisis Management Cell director general retired Brig Javed Iqbal Cheema did not support the prosecution case. The third witness, former Intelligence Bureau (IB) director general Ejaz Shah, was dropped by the prosecution.

    Published in Dawn, November 24th, 2015

  11. #431
    Senior Member Jameel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    3,802
    Thanks
    1714
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Special court orders re-investigation in treason case

    ISLAMABAD: A three-member special court ordered the federal government on Friday to re-investigate former president retired Gen Pervez Musharraf, former prime minister Shaukat Aziz, former chief justice of the Supreme Court Abdul Hameed Dogar and incumbent Minister for Climate Change Zahid Hamid in the high treason case and submit its report by Dec 17.

    The court headed by Justice Faisal Arab turned down a request for including representatives of the Military Intelligence (MI), Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and Intelligence Bureau (IB) in the joint investigation team (JIT).

    The court said in its order that if the JIT could not complete the investigation by Dec 17, a progress report on the probe be submitted at the next hearing on Dec 17.

    The four-page order referred to a statement submitted by the federal government to the Islamabad High Court that it was ready to re-investigate the case.

    The statement was submitted to the high court during hearing of petitions filed by Shaukat Aziz, Zahid Hamid and Abdul Hameed Dogar against the special court’s Nov 2014 order nominating them as co-accused in the treason case.

    The special court observed that the request by Barrister Farogh Nasim, the lead counsel for Gen Musharraf, for including the representatives of MI, ISI and IB in the investigation team was contrary to the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) Act 1974.

    Barrister Mohammad Akram Sheikh, head of the prosecution team, argued that since high treason was one of the schedule offences in the act, only the FIA could investigate the case.

    The court said: “We may clarify that the job of the investigation team is only to collect the evidence and place it before the court. The investigation team keeping in view the event (imposition of emergency on Nov 3, 2007) which is the basis of this complaint has to record statements of the persons who could be presumed to be associated with the commission of the alleged crime…The investigation team shall be free to examine any official record of the federal government or any other document that is made available by the persons whose statements are to be recorded.

    “In the process whatever documents that in the opinion of the investigation team may have any relevance with the main event the same shall also be examined so that the truth can be ascertained.”

  12. #432
    Senior Member Hope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,856
    Thanks
    3799
    Pakistan United Arab Emirates

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Cas has been going on for 5 years. Where are we going here apart from wasting state funds we haven't got?

  13. #433
    Senior Member Felix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    5,517
    Thanks
    2606
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    FIA seeks emergency record from ministries, GHQ

    ISLAMABAD: The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) has asked the ministries of defence and law, cabinet and the army’s General Headquarters for the custody of the entire record related to the Nov 3, 2007 emergency imposed by military ruler Pervez Musharraf whose statement will be recorded on Dec 22.

    According to a progress report submitted by an investigation team to the special court hearing a treason case against Mr Musharraf, this will be followed by questioning of his close aides, including incumbent federal minister Zahid Hamid, former prime minister Shaukat Aziz and former chief justice of Pakistan Abdul Hameed Dogar.

    A joint investigation team, headed by former additional director general of FIA Mohammad Khalid Qureshi, formed in June 2013 that probed the matter till November had failed to obtain the record from GHQ despite repeated attempts.

    Also read: New JIT to reopen Musharraf treason case

    The FIA is seeking the record from GHQ because retired Gen Musharraf had said while proclaiming emergency that he had consulted the then premier, governors of all provinces, the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee’s chairman, the armed forces’ chiefs, vice chief of the army staff and the corps commanders.

    Musharraf willing to record statement on 22nd in treason case
    The previous JIT said in its report submitted to the court on May 13, 2014: “The inquiry team made a number of attempts to obtain summary, notes and proposal, etc. concerning proclamation of emergency… However, despite the appointment of focal officer Mr Anzar Rizvi by ministry of defence no such document or relevant record was provided or shown to the inquiry team.”

    The progress report submitted now says: “The secretary, ministry of defence, has been requested through a reminder letter to provide documents related to issuance of proclamation of emergency.”

    It requested 30-day time for completing the investigation. “Keeping in view the progress, the investigation team requires more time to procure the important documents, as well as for recording statements.”

    The four-member team, headed by the FIA’s Additional DG Wajid Zia, has sent letters to Mr Musharraf and his aides regarding the recording of their statements.

    According to the report, the former army chief has expressed willingness to record his statement on Dec 22.

    The investigators wanted to examine him on Dec 14, but his staff informed them that he would not be available on that date.

    The team sought 30 days to complete investigation against the alleged abettors in the case.

    It has also asked the law ministry and cabinet division to provide the “noting portion of the summary moved to the then prime minister of Pakistan on Nov 3, 2007 for appointment of Mr Abdul Hameed Dogar as Chief Justice of Pakistan, containing approval of the law minister”.

    Mr Hamid, who was law minister at that time, is currently serving in the PML-N government’s cabinet.

    The investigation team asked the law ministry to provide certified copies of the approved summaries for the appointment of the chief justices of the Peshawar and Sindh high courts.

    The special court resumed the proceedings on Wednesday but its judge Justice Faisal Arab was not available because of his elevation to the Supreme Court and the remaining members, Justice Tahira Safdar of the Balochistan High Court and Justice Yawar Ali of Lahore High Court, adjourned the matter till Jan 13.

    The court observed that the proceedings might resume on the next date if the government nominated a judge to fill the seat of Justice Arab.

  14. #434
    Senior Member Pak92's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,841
    Thanks
    1636
    Pakistan Pakistan

    Re: Treason Case Against Musharraf: News and Discussions

    Musharraf treason trial: AG asked to answer Dogar’s questions

    ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked Attorney General Salman Aslam Butt to come out with answers of what had been highlighted by former chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar against implicating his name in the fresh probe in the Musharraf treason trial.

    A three-judge Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Mian Saqib Nisar issued notices to the AG after hearing Iftikhar Gillani who is pleading the case of Mr Dogar.

    The former chief justice had challenged the Dec 12, 2015, order of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) that had upheld the Nov 27, 2015, direction of the three-man special court hearing treason trial against former president retired Gen Pervez Musharraf that had ordered the investigation team concerned to re-investigate the treason case by ‘interrogating’ Mr Musharraf, former prime minister Shaukat Aziz, former minister Zahid Hamid and Mr Dogar as well as persons who could be presumed to be associated with the commission of alleged crime.

    Being aggrieved of the special court order, Mr Dogar through his counsel Iftikhar Gillani instituted a challenge before the IHC with a plea that by issuing directions to investigate him, the special court had assumed a suo motu jurisdiction which has not been conferred upon it, adding the special court through its Nov 27 order had treated him at par with the principal accused (Mr Musharraf) in utter violation of the law and beyond the jurisdiction of the special court.

    On Tuesday, Mr Gillani argued before the apex court that neither the high court nor the special court had the jurisdiction under Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act, 1976, to order investigation against the person whose names were not included in the list of accused forwarded by the federal government earlier.

    The special court has a limited jurisdiction as provided in the law and the procedure to be followed during the trial was explicitly mandated in Section 6 of the Act.

    The counsel argued that the Supreme Court in its July 31, 2009, judgment had already held that Mr Musharraf was individually responsible for the proclamation of Nov 3, 2007, emergency.

    Moreover, there was no material evidence on record to connect Mr Dogar with the alleged crime, he stated, adding the principle of trichotomy of power, as enshrined in the constitution, Mr Dogar as the chief justice had nothing to do with the functioning of the executive.

    To allege in the special court order, he emphasised that Mr Dogar would not have been elevated as the chief justice if he had not consented to the issuance of proclamation of emergency and subsequent provisional constitution order (PCO) of 2007 was not only perverse but tantamount to demeaning the stature of the superior courts of Pakistan.

    The petition recalled that after the lifting of the emergency and the restoration of the constitution on Dec 15, 2007, all judges of the apex court who had taken oath under PCO (provisional constitution order) took fresh oath under the constitution.

    Mr Dogar argued that he continued to function during the emergency period from Nov 3 to Dec 15, 2007 till the time he was retired on March 22, 2009.

Page 22 of 22 FirstFirst ... 12171819202122

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 25th June 2013, 10:47
  2. Musharraf challenges SCís domain to hear treason case
    By Sinbad in forum Current Affairs
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 14th April 2013, 20:30
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14th April 2013, 05:42
  4. Kayaniís name surfaces in Musharraf treason case
    By ajtr in forum Current Affairs
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10th April 2013, 09:52
  5. SC to hear treason case against Musharraf
    By Sinbad in forum Current Affairs
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 5th April 2013, 12:50

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us on twitter Follow us on twitter