ISLAMABAD Babar Awan, the former federal law minister who resigned to be the federations counsel in the ZAB murder reference, on Thursday could not satisfy the Supreme Court on the term the 'Question of Law raised in the reference. Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, heading a three-member bench, said there was some lacuna in drafting of the reference. Justice Sair Ali asked the PPP leader to limit it to Article 186 as the court has to set the mechanics of the case. Article 186 of the Constitution empowers the President to refer any question of public importance to the Supreme Court to get its opinion. The apex court has the authority to consider the question referred to it by the President and give its opinion. The chief justice asked Babar Awan to explain the definition of term 'Question of Law. Dont show haste in the case as the court is seriously hearing it, the counsel was told. The CJ said the whole world is looking at the case (of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto). He asked Babar to put everything before the court in a proper manner. He said the court has to issue notices to the Attorney General of Pakistan and have to engage amicus curiae in the case. The chief justice said references are sent to the court with a specific question for which answers are required. He said references were filed in the court in the past as well on issues like that of trouble in passing budget in Balochistan and Hasba Bill. Justice Sair Ali stated that the advice of the Prime Minister was not sought on the specific question of law. It reveals the mind of the movers, as they were asking the court to revisit the case instead through the 'Question of Law, he said. Babar Awan, in order to dispel this impression, said the reference was placed before the entire cabinet in which not only the PPP ministers, but also the coalition parties members supported the government stance on the presidential reference, filed under Article 186. He said the issue was taken even in the PPP Central Executive Committee meeting. The ex-minister for law and justice told the court that Maulvi Mushtaq, the then chief justice of Lahore High Court, was biased against ZAB, adding his prejudice against Bhutto was not hidden to anyone. Babar pleaded that Bhutto was awarded capital punishment on the statement of a sole approver, adding erstwhile no one in the country was convicted on the testimony of the approver. He said abettor was declared principal accused in the Bhutto murder case. He requested the court that the question of bias must be revisited. Justice Ghulam Rabbani stated that the question of bias does not come under the jurisdiction of Article 186. He asked the ex-minister to satisfy the court on the subject of revisiting. The chief justice said revisiting Bhutto case would make it a judicial precedent and if Bhuttos case was reopened then every convict in a murder case would file a review appeal. The chief justice said if you talk about revisiting, then the court had to revisit three judgments - SC 53, 38 and 741 - in the murder of Bhutto (case). Babar Awan said that there were precedents all over the world where old cases were reopened. He said in the US, 51 years old case was reopened. The chief justice said not only in the US but in India cases were revisited, adding in India great law was developed as they have curative jurisdiction, which is not in Pakistan. The CJP said revisiting evidence is not covered in Article 186, and asked him to assist the court on the 'Question of Law. Babar Awan said that the scope of it is wider and there was Article 187 in 1973 Constitution. The chief justice remarked that Article 187 is not invoked in such kinds of cases. Babar Awan said Bhutto was sentenced by four judges of the 7-member bench, while three had written a dissenting note. He said that Bhutto was not given the right of hearing. The chief justice stated but review judgment was unanimously passed by seven judges of the apex court. When the PPP leader was quoting points from different books, the chief justice asked him that they were bound to go in accordance with the law. He said the presidential reference filed under Article 186 needs an answer, therefore there was no need to be emotional. Babar Awan earlier informed the bench that he had quit the law ministry and sent his notification to President Asif Ali Zardari and the Pakistan Bar Council had revived his licence. The chief justice in a light vein said: We would be missing you somewhere (Judicial Commission). The court adjourned the case till April 18. APP adds: Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, former Law Minister in Bhuttos led PPP government and senior advocate of the Supreme Court, said that the Apex Court could only give opinion on the Presidential reference about reopening of Bhuttos murder case which would have historic impacts. Talking to the mediamen in the Supreme Court building, he said that court could not give judgment on reference, however, the constitution had given power to it for expressing an opinion having a worth but it would not be judgment or review. According to the Article 186 of the Constitution, the Judges of the Supreme Court are bound to give opinion on the question of law which has public importance, he said. He said that a number of commissions were made in the whole world for assessment of the judgment, adding that former Attorney General of United States had formed a commission to give an opinion. Bhutto was not convicted or sentenced on basis of any principal of law, he added. Pirzada said that a new bench would be constituted and it would comprise on more than three judges adding that amicus curiae( lawyers to assist court) would be appointed for proceedings. The Court also can call the relevant witnesses for evidences, he added. Answering to a query, he said I had been a part of the history and had passed last 40 days with Zullifkar Ali Bhutto in the jail from Feb 11,1979 to March 31st, adding that I would assist the Court if it asked for.