Benazir Bhutto's assassination case: there's no independent investigation agency in Pakistan: CJP

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Attorney General for Pakistan to seek instructions from government within a fortnight on a plea that had sought the registration of a fresh FIR against former President Pervez Musharraf and others in Benazir Bhutto assassination case.
However, all the respondents of the petition, including former president Pervez Musharraf, Interior Minister Rehman Malik, former law minister Babar Awan and former Punjab chief minister Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, were also directed to file their detailed replies to the court within two weeks.
The bench comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Tariq Parvez summoned the record of the case along with the copies of order-sheets and the progress made so far by the Anti-Terrorism Court, Rawalpindi, where the case is under adjudication. Besides, the bench decided to constitute a larger bench to hear the plea.
Expressing his concern over non-co-operation by the FIA, the Chief Justice observed that there was no independent investigation agency in the country. Therefore, he added, the court could form a joint investigation team consisting of top officials from all the four provinces to investigate the matter.
"It is an extraordinary case involving the assassination of a former prime minister and the country's president also wishes to know about it, so take it seriously," the CJP told the AGP. The court also asked the AGP about the status of the case in the trial court. He was also asked whether he was satisfied with the trial court's proceedings.
The bench inquired from the AGP about the federation's contentions regarding the registration of second FIR in Benazir Bhutto assassination case and whether or not there was any need of doing so. The Chief Justice noted, "Now we have two options - either to dismiss the plea or accept it for regular hearing, if appellant satisfies us."
He said the UN and the Scotland Yard had also investigated the matter, adding that since the case involved the assassination of a former premier, responsibilities had multiplied. The CJP observed that the affected person, who received injuries during the fatal assassination attack on the former premier, was not satisfied, thus the court's responsibilities to look into the matter had increased manifold.
The Chief Justice noted that the appellant was struggling to get justice for the last two years and his matter was of a serious nature. "Why don't you take it seriously?" the CJP asked the AGP. According to appellant, the CJP added, he did know better about the incident because he was on the spot where he received injuries.
Justice Tariq Parvez asked how the government was claiming to be satisfied with the trial when the appellant was saying at mass level that he was not satisfied with the proceedings of the case before the trial court. He asked: Why didn't the legal heirs of Benazir Bhutto get an FIR registered? The AGP replied that her children and sister lived abroad.
The CJP recalled that President Asif Ali Zardari had asked the court, during his address to a public gathering at Garhi Khuda Bakhsh on the death anniversary of Benazir Bhutto about what it had done in the assassination case of Benazir Bhutto. He said the President wanted to know about the progress in the case.
"Mr Attorney General, how do you see and what weight do you give to the statement of the president," the CJP asked the federation's top legal officer. The CJP said the President had asked why the court had not taken a suo motu notice of the matter, but now a regular appeal had come.
"Now you take instructions from the government, otherwise we know what is the attitude of FIA with the court," the CJP asked the AGP, adding that since there existed no independent investigation agency in the country, the court might form a joint investigation team consisting of senior officials from all the provinces to investigate the case.
He said people also wanted to know about some other cases, but the FIA's non-co-operation was the main hindrance. The appellant, Chaudhry Muhammad Aslam, the then protocol officer of Benazir Bhutto, told the court that he was trying to register second FIR since July 8, 2009, but all in vain.
To a question why he sought to register a second FIR after two years of the incident, he said he had been told earlier that the investigation was going in the right direction. He said it was mandatory to know that who was present on the place of the incident and who fled on his vehicle at that time, adding that just after the incident, many leaders disappeared from the crime scene, which was an important point to be noted. He also questioned the non-installation of jammers at the place of public gathering addressed by the late Benazir Bhutto.
The 12 respondents are; former President General Musharraf, former Punjab chief minister Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, Interior Minister Rehman Malik, former law minister Babar Awan, the then acting interior minister Lieutenant General Hamid Nawaz (Retd), former director general of Intelligence Bureau Ijaz Hussain Shah, former interior secretary Syed Kamal Shah, the then Crisis Management Cell head Brigadier Javed Iqbal Cheema, the then Rawalpindi DCO Irfan Elahi, SSP, Rawalpindi Saud Aziz and SPs Khurram Shehzad and Yasin Farooq.
On June 23, 2011, Rawalpindi Bench of the Lahore High Court had dismissed a plea of Chaudhry Aslam, through which he had requested the court to order the authorities concerned to put the names of Babar Awan and Rehman Malik on Exit Control List (ECL). One of the judges had written an additional note, that Chaudhry Aslam had no locus standi in the matter.
In his plea before the Supreme Court, Chaudhry Aslam contended that the Lahore High Court's June 23 decision was unlawful, perverse, without jurisdiction and based on the fanciful application of the mind. He submitted that the Lahore High Court had failed to give due consideration to the United Nations report, on which $60 million were spent to investigate Benazir Bhutto's assassination. The hearing was adjourned for two weeks.