Senior journalist Arshad Sharif. Photo: Twitter
ISLAMABAD:
The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has disposed of the suo motu proceedings in the murder of senior journalist Arshad Sharif, holding that continued judicial oversight would effectively place the court in the role of supervising the investigation itself.
Disposing of the case taken up by former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, the court observed that if it were to oversee and monitor the probe by keeping the matter pending, it would, in effect, be supervising every aspect of the investigation.
In a 14-page order written by Justice Aamer Farooq while disposing of the suo motu case, which was taken by the ex-chief justice for the probe of the murder of Arshad Sharif, the FCC observed that the constitution guarantees the right to a fair trial under Article 10-A.
It stressed that the right necessarily extends to an investigation that is free, independent, and transparent. An impartial investigation requires that evidence be collected from all perspectives, including material that may support the defence as well as the one which advances the case of the prosecution.
The order observed that in case the legal heirs of Arshad Sharif have any specific grievance in the matter, they can approach the court of competent jurisdiction. “We acknowledge and share the grief felt by our Nation and the journalist community over the death of our citizen.”
It also said that an investigation must be conducted in a holistic manner. “Only when the person entrusted with the investigation is able to act independently and without undue pressure can relevant evidence be properly collected and the matter effectively carried forward to trial. Therefore, the protection afforded by Article 10A does not commence only at the stage of arraignment; rather, it begins from the very inception of the investigation,” the order states.
“We also note that perusal of Supreme Court’s Order dated March 17th, 2023 shows that Mr. Shaukat Aziz Siddiqi entered appearance on behalf of the mother, widow and five children of the deceased journalist, Mr. Sharif, and categorically contended that as SJIT has been formed the Court’s supervision though “bona fide” is impermissible, but the Court rejected the assertion despite the settled jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, with which we are in agreement, mandated that the Court should refrain from interfering in matters relating to investigation.”
The FCC held that if this court were to issue judicial orders directing the state, including the federal government, to represent the matter internationally, it would not only amount to interference in the ongoing investigation, which is already proceeding under the MLA agreement, but would also encroach upon the domain of foreign policy.
“Undoubtedly, matters of foreign relations are best handled by the MoFA and the Federal Government, who are better equipped to determine what serves the purposes of Article 40 and what is appropriate in the international context,” the order states.
The court also noted that since the Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) agreement has been signed between the two nations and they are also coordinating at the diplomatic level to implement it, “we are of the view that the authorities of both countries are taking appropriate action under their respective laws. Therefore, there is no need for any judicial interference in this regard when the law and investigation is taking its due course”.
