Hearing of presidential reference resumes: Repentance is individual not an institutional act, says CJ

While resuming hearing of presidential reference on Monday, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry said as to why the judges should have regrets over others' mistakes, adding that repentance was individual and not an institutional act.
A larger bench comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk, Justice Muhammad Sair Ali, Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui, Justice Jawad S Khawaja, Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain, Justice Sarmad Jalal Osmani and Justice Ghulam Rabbani was hearing the reference.
In his arguments, Awan quoted a number of verses from the Holy Quran and Hadith saying sentence of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was against Islamic injunctions, adding that as inscribed in Islamic jurisprudence, killer is awarded death sentence while the abettor could be awarded imprisonment.
Dr Awan contended that there was no direct evidence to establish conspiracy and award death penalty to Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. He pleaded that justice has to be done with mercy under the Islamic jurisprudence. He added that there was no restriction on the court to revisit its earlier judgement under Article 186 of the Constitution of Pakistan.
He further argued that wrong was committed or if there was an error of judgment then the wrong must have been undone irrespective of any other consideration. Adding more weight to his arguments, Dr Babar Awan took the plea that the revision should be under the concept of repentance, adding that former Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Nasim Hassan Shah had acknowledged the wrong.
The CJP observed that it is an individual's repentance and should not be taken as institutional. Dr Awan pointed out that in the Z A Bhutto case, personal anger of the head of the Lahore High Court bench was abundantly clear against the former prime minister, which is against the norms of justice.
The bench repeatedly observed that the case involved litigation between the two parties and what if the son of the murdered wanted to enter the witness box. He asked the counsel to give examples where cases of adverse nature were referred to the court and decided. Babar Awan maintained that one such case is of Hasba Bill - passed by the Provincial Assembly of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (the then NWFP) which was referred to the SC by the Federation and the MMA government was the other party in the case. The court adjourned the hearing till June 28 (Tuesday).