ISLAMABAD Supreme Court allowed AK Dogar, a senior SC advocate, to submit amended writ petition seeking initiation of a trial of former President and military dictator Pervez Musharraf under Article 6 of the Constitution. Dogar informed the apex court that he wanted that former president Pervez Musharraf should be tried under the Article-6 for his violation of the SCs verdict in Syed Zafar Ali Shah case, PLD 2000 SC, which had held that no major structural amendment could be introduced in the Constitution. He said his second issue pertained to insertion of 17th Amendment and LFO, which changed the basic structure of the 1973 Constitution. He said he would not press upon his third prayer regarding handing over the civilian rule to the Parliament within specific period by the former president. A six-member larger bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and comprising Justice Chaudhry Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain, Justice Rahmat Hussain Jafferi, Justice Tariq Pervez and Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday adjourned the hearing till filing of the petition by A K Dogar on behalf of the Pakistan Lawyers Forum. To the benchs query, he replied that he would like to argue his points that 17th Amendment had not been repealed so far. The Constitutional Reforms Committee had referred the matter to a sub-committee. The Chief Justice remarked, We do not know what will be the outcome of such deliberations and whether it will satisfy a counsel like you. It is up to you now. During the proceedings, the CJ advised him to wait for the introduction of 18th Amendment. The bench pointed out that he had not amended the current status of the former president and his address, on which Dogar assured that he would provide his present address. In his petitions, Dogar had raised the points whether or not the Parliament had the powers to validate any act of the chief executive, which was against the apex courts clear direction in Syed Zafar Ali Shahs case. These amendments through the LFO were diametrically against to the universally accepted concept of the parliamentary democracy and the Parliament could not extend validity to the violations of Constitutional norms, the writs maintained.