| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Two petitions on president's immunity |
| 2009-12-20 |
| [Dawn] The constitutional provision granting immunity from prosecution to the president was the subject of two petitions filed in the Supreme Court on Saturday. One of the petitions contended that even a foreign court cannot try the president while the other called for doing away with the immunity clause. The Watan Party filed in the Supreme Court a constitutional petition challenging the reopening of Swiss cases against President Asif Ali Zardari, saying the president also enjoys 'sovereign immunity' against foreign courts, besides constitutional immunity under Article 248 against local courts. The petition was filed at the Lahore registry of the Supreme Court. Barrister Zafarullah Khan, counsel for the Watan Party, said that previously the cases were pending in Swiss courts for the recovery of laundered money in favour of state and Mr Zardari appeared in those cases as a private individual, along with his wife Benazir Bhutto. But now Mr Zardari had become the president and state immunity was attached to his office, the counsel said, adding that the president could not be summoned or sued in any case whatsoever by any court of any country during his term as president. Barrister Zafar said the Supreme Court verdict reopening cases against President Zardari was beyond its jurisdiction. He requested the court to review its decision and declare it as void because it undermined the sovereignty and independence of the nation. On Dec 16, the Supreme Court annulled the National Reconciliation Ordinance and ordered reopening of money laundering cases being heard in a Swiss Court. The case was withdrawn under NRO, which was promulgated by former president Pervez Musharraf. Immunity challenged A former officer of the ISI on Saturday filed in the Supreme Court a petition seeking an end to the protection available to the president under the Constitution, saying the immunity was against fundamental rights. "Article 248 of the Constitution (presidential immunity) be declared ultra vires as it is in infringement of the fundamental rights of citizens/persons guaranteed in chapter I of Part II of the Constitution, the norms of natural justice as promulgated in Quran and Sunnah," said the petition moved by Khalid Khawaja, chairman of the Defence of Human Rights Organisation. This is the third such petition filed in the apex court after the Dec 16 verdict on the NRO. The two previous petitions were filed by Engineer Jamil, of the Communist Party of Pakistan, and Syed Mohammad Iqbal, of the Human Rights Commission for South Asia, seeking to do away with Article 248 which provides immunity to the president and governors. Senior lawyer Naseer Ahmed Chaudhry said that Clause 3 of Article 248 prevented courts from issuing any order for the arrest or imprisonment of the president or the governor during their time in office. Khalid Khawaja, who will appear in person to plead his case, contended in his petition that Article 248 in its entirety was against the Constitution and the norms of Islam that guaranteed equality, dignity and respect for humankind. "The protection is also not in consonance with Article 25 (equality of citizens) which guarantees equal protection of law to all citizens. It means that the president and the governor are free to commit any crime or rob the public treasury and could even commit high treason, but they would not be answerable to any court or forum during the term of their office," the petition said, adding that they could even flee the country after committing crimes like former president Pervez Musharraf. "It is only because of Article 248 and the protection to our rulers, our homeland has been degraded in the eyes of the world." The nation, the petition said, was divided on this issue as many people, including members of parliament, were agitating against this protection which should not be available to dignitaries. "The Islamic concepts as envisaged by the objective resolution under Article 2-A of the Constitution should prevail to ensure a just political system and an Islamic welfare state." The petition said that the Supreme Court should resolve the protection issue by declaring the provisions not only in contravention of Articles 227, 25 and 2-A, but also ultra vires of the Constitution and its principles enunciated by the apex court from time to time. |
| Posted by:Fred |