The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has stayed the implementation of the death sentence to former Pakistan Navy officers earlier awarded this punishment by a court-martial order.
Justice Babar Sattar ordered this order in a petition that stated these officials were not provided legal assistance in the court-martial order.
According to a report, an appeal was filed against the death sentence of five naval officials and was dismissed by the authorities concerned pleading that the reasons for the appeal court said the petitioners’ lawyers said they were given limited access to the pleaded documents despite a court order. This deprived the petitioners from defending their rights. Assistant Attorney General (AAG) Akeel Akhtar Raja was reported saying that Chief of the Naval Staff Admiral Naveed Ashraf had the authority to access the documents, according to rule 193 of the Pakistan Navy Rules, 1961, the decision was bestowed with him to form an opinion that supply of any proceedings may be prejudicial to the safety or interests of the state.
The AAG said in terms of the above rule, the naval chief had formed an opinion in the cases that sharing details of the proceedings, including the findings recorded by the general court-martial and the order passed in appeal upholding the death penalty, would be harmful to the safety or the interests of the state. The court inquired whether the naval chief’s opinion was placed on file, and the AAG replied in negative.
The court order said, “The question before the court is how the interests of the state are to be balanced against the interests of an individual to his right to live as well as his right to due process guaranteed by Articles 9 and 10A of the Constitution. It appears to be the contention of the state that given the opinion of the chief of naval staff that proceedings and reasoning for passing the death sentence cannot be shared with those against whom such death sentences have been passed, they have no further remedy under the law and the Constitution. The question arises as to how the interests of the state in secrecy are to be balanced against the interests of a citizen to be informed of the reasons for which the state has decided to hang him and to provide him the relevant reasoning and material to be able to defend himself.”
It further directed “Given that the fundamental question of protection of right to life and due process is in question, the petitioners shall not be executed till the disposal of the petition.” The order also directed the respondents to file the naval chief’s opinion within three weeks, along with the reasoning, why he formed the opinion that sharing the proceedings about the petitioners would be damaging to the state. The court proceedings were adjourned till the first of the next month.
(By Rana Kashif)
