A five member bench of the Supreme Court has suspended the SHC decision to remove Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s name from the ECL. Not bothering to go into the pros and cons of the case, one wonders how the SHC had given the verdict in the first place and why has the SCP now given orders to the contrary? Did the SHC hear some different arguments than the ones heard by the SCP? Did the SHC apply a different law? And if it was the same law, then how did the SHC interpret it differently?
If this was a matter of interpretation of the same law, then does it mean that the honourable judges of the SC are more competent in interpreting the law than the honourable judges of the High Courts? Weren’t they (SCP judges) once also the judges of similar courts? If they were competent, which they are, then pray tell me what makes them interpret the law differently? Incidentally, the decision of the lower courts are reversed by their higher counterparts in many cases around the world, and not only in Pakistan.
COL. RIAZ JAFRI (RETD),
Rawalpindi, June 23.