The Supreme Court’s Chief Justice, Qazi Faez Isa, has given a 48-page detailed judgment on the president’s reference to Zulfiqar Bhutto. He observed that there were no elements of fairness in the trial of Bhutto and that there was nothing linking him directly with his murder.
Queries over Transparency in Cases
Justice Isa said that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s trial lacked fairness and transparency. Bhutto’s simple defense was insufficient, leading to his execution by courts that failed to follow constitutional principles. Justice Issa stated that Bhutto’s innocence meant he was wrongly condemned due to inadequate evidence.
Inadequate Legal Grounds
The opinion explains that Bhutto was tried and sentenced during martial law, a period when the regime suspended fundamental rights. The courts lacked independence and were controlled by the martial law regime. This lack of independence undermined the fairness of the trial.
Role of Martial Law Regime
Justice Isa pointed out that the judges who took an oath of loyalty to the military regime could no longer be considered impartial. The verdict that sentenced Bhutto to death directly benefited General Zia-ul-Haq, who had overthrown Bhutto’s government. If Bhutto had been released, he could have potentially initiated high treason charges against General Zia.
Delay in Presidential Reference
The opinion highlighted that scheduling a hearing for the presidential reference on Bhutto’s case took eleven years. By then, all the judges who initially heard the reference had retired. In the opinion, significant issues raised included the delay and insufficient evidence for the death penalty.
Limitations of the Presidential Reference
The Supreme Court clarified that the presidential reference was neither an appeal nor a review petition. The Constitution or law does not provide a mechanism to annul a final decision through a presidential reference. Once the Supreme Court dismissed the review, Bhutto’s death sentence became final.
Legal and Constitutional Flaws
The opinion stated that there were no judicial orders for the FIA to reopen the investigation into Zulfiqar Bhutto case, which the police had already completed. The High Court’s trial of the case rendered many legal provisions ineffective. Those responsible for protecting Bhutto’s fundamental rights violated them.
Key Points of the Opinion
- Significant legal and constitutional flaws marked the trial.
- The firearm evidence did not match the weapons from the FSF, the force allegedly used for the murder.
- Bhutto’s speeches in Parliament were unjustly used against him, which is not permissible in court.
The Supreme Court gave a detailed opinion on what went wrong with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s trial, both in procedure and substance. Shows that the martial law regime greatly influenced the judiciary at that time.
