Hearing on the reference against Bhutto's execution, welcome action!

Syed Hamza Abbas Naqvi

In civilized countries this tradition is of great importance to open old doubted cases, and to lay before the public the truth of the same. And wherever mistakes have been made, such a plan of action should be made to avoid such "blunders" again. A similar case is not only under discussion in Pakistan, but in the Supreme Court today, Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa. A 9-member larger bench headed by him is also hearing it. This case has been scheduled for hearing after 11 years. It was filed by former President Asif Ali Zardari in the Supreme Court in April 2011. So far, 6 cases have been filed in the Supreme Court on the presidential reference related to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. The hearings have been held. The first hearing was held on January 2, 2012, while the last hearing was held on November 12, 2012. The first 5 hearings were conducted by the 11-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. The relevant presidential references are based on five questions. The first question of the presidential reference is that the trial of the murder of Zulfikar Bhutto was in accordance with the basic human rights enshrined in the constitution. Article 189 will apply to High Courts? If not, what will be the consequences of this decision? The third question is whether it was a fair decision to sentence Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to death. Was the decision to give death sentence to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto biased? The fourth question asks whether the death sentence given to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto is correct in the light of Quranic orders. While the fifth question is whether the evidence given against Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and the statements of the witnesses were enough to convict him.
Well, the hearing of the case, which is starting from today, is definitely the darkest stain in our history, which neither the judiciary nor the institutions have been able to wash till date. Rather, I would say that Bhutto's execution left many questions behind. The most important question was whether the testimony against Bhutto of the other 4 criminals who were sentenced to death in the murder of Nawab Muhammad Ahmad was legally acceptable and credible. Questions were also raised on Bhutto's trial. The High Court bench that heard Bhutto's case was headed by Chief Justice Lahore High Court Moulvi Mushtaq, who was appointed by Zia-ul-Haq, and it was Moulvi Mushtaq, whose promotion was stopped by Bhutto and 8 years junior judge of Lahore High Court. made the Chief Justice of Then Justice Naseem Hasan Shah, who heard Bhutto's case in the Supreme Court, called him Bhutto's enemy in a TV interview. The statement of Justice Naseem Hasan Shah is also very important that 'Bhutto's lawyer had angered the judges with his arguments'. And the most important thing is that there was also an assumption that the US was angry with Bhutto and wanted to mark him. I wanted to make a lesson. In this context, Henry Kissinger's threat to Bhutto and former US attorney Ramsey Clark's statement published in the New York Times are of special importance, in which he describes Bhutto's loss of power as the result of American blessing. According to analysts. The US sidetracked Bhutto to get the results it wanted in the Cold War. Bhutto himself gave a statement that the white elephant was angry with him. Both those who sentenced Bhutto to death and those who received Bhutto's body had no idea that Zulfiqar Ali, who started his political career in the cabinet of Ayub Khan. Bhutto will become immortal after his death. According to me, it was Bhutto's death that breathed new life into Pakistan People's Party, it was Bhutto's death that gave power to this party 3 times, it was Bhutto's death. Who made Benazir Bhutto the first woman Prime Minister of the Muslim world.
And as for the murder of the said Mehmood Ali Kasuri, if his relationship is mixed with that of Bhutto, then it is just like two good friends who started a partnership, then later they became friends with each other. They started such fronts against him that it reached the point of life and death. In fact, Mahmood Ali Kasuri was one of Bhutto's old associates, and Kasuri was also counted among the leaders who strengthened the PPP in Punjab. Then in 1966, when Bhutto Sahib resigned from the Ayub Cabinet, he came to Lahore on the invitation of Kasuri Sahib and from here he took him to Kasur. According to Mehmood Ali Kasuri's son Ahmad Raza Kasuri (former PML-Q leader), Bhutto was also inspired by his father Baba Bhale Shah to give Bhutto the slogan 'Roti Kapra Makan'. Then, three days before the formal establishment of the People's Party, Bhutto announced at his residence in Kasur that he was going to make this slogan a part of his manifesto. Then the series continued like this and in December 1970, Ahmad Raza Kasuri Pakistan Elected Member of National Assembly from Kasur on PPP ticket.
 Now let's come to the differences between the two leaders, readers! The basis of the differences between the two leaders was that after the elections, Bhutto decided not to attend the session of the National Assembly convened in Dhaka on March 3, 1971, nor would he allow any other member of the assembly to do so. Some newspapers wrote that the legs of those who do this will be broken. But unlike Bhutto, Ahmed Raza Kasuri reached Dhaka to participate in this meeting, but this meeting was not held. This is where the distance between Bhutto and Kasuri started to grow. Then Bhutto took action against him and suspended his party membership. On which the next day Mr. Kasuri held a press conference. In which he announced the dismissal of PPP Chairman Bhutto. In response, the People's Party executive committee later formally expelled Kasuri from the party membership and thus the gap between Bhutto and Kasuri deepened.
Then, Pakistan was divided and the process of making a new constitution started, even then the differences between the two remained the same, rather, they continued to fight in the assembly. Rather, when the 1973 constitution came up for approval in the House, Kasuri was among the three people who did not sign it. Kasuri's speeches against Bhutto and the People's Party continued in the assembly. On June 4, 1974, Bhutto, while speaking in the National Assembly, said that the noise and uproar of the opposition on the constitution is unjustified because all the members of the opposition have signed the constitution. Has done and this is a consensus constitution. On this, Kasuri addressed the speaker and said that the distinguished speakers coming from Ratu Dero are working with false statements. The whole world knows that I did not sign the constitution. Did not vote for it. Then how can you say that the constitution has been signed by all and it is a consensual constitution?' Bhutto was furious at this intervention and these remarks and pointed at Kasuri and shouted, 'I have this person. has endured a lot. This embodied poison is a killer. Now we will not tolerate it at all. After that in November 1974, there was a murderous attack on Mahmood Ali Kasuri and the next day, on November 12, there was a news in the English newspaper that "The head of Tehreek Istiqlal, Asghar Khan (politician and Human rights lawyer) said in a press conference at the residence of Mian Mehmood Ali Kasuri that the killers had tried to kill Ahmad Raza Kasuri and had attacked him three times before. He expressed regret that so far 24 political leaders and activists have been killed, whose killers have not been found. Qasuri, nine days after the murder of his father, on November 20, 1974, in the session of the National Assembly with red fluid. Come with a bottle. He claimed that the bottle contained his father's blood. He also brought a blood-stained shirt and announced that assassination attacks on government MPs would be exposed.
Then, the distance between Ahmad Raza Kasuri and the People's Party was reduced, but for the March 1977 elections, the Pakistan People's Party did not give a ticket to Ahmad Raza Kasuri. The parliamentary board of the party described him as a 'disillusioned person'. On which he again went to the court with his father's case and others also took advantage of it and Bhuttosaheb was hanged on the gallows on the basis of this case. What is the depth of this case? Who poured how much water into the case and who benefited from it under the doctrine of necessity? Of course, in the hearing starting today, the same things will be discussed and hopefully in detail, and no one will be hurt by these things. Because we should understand that in politics we will not be able to improve ourselves until we find our mistakes and shortcomings!