Islamabad:

The Apex Court has finally issued a written order and instructed anti-terrorism courts (ATCs) to end the trial of accused persons involved in May 9, events within a period of four months.

However, the court ordered ATCs to ensure that the rights of defendant respondents to a fair trial should not be prevented in any way.

“We are aware of paragraphs.

“In light of the peculiar circumstances, especially the large number of accused, lack the diversity of cases derived from the cases of a similar nature reported separately and the significant number of prosecution quarters, we require that the trial in the immediate case will be terminated within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order,” the order adds.

“We further refer to the Anti-Terrorism Court to ensure that the rights of the accused respondents to a fair trial should not be hindered in any way at all.”

Instead of deciding dozens of guarantee cases of profits, the three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi chosen different ways by direction of ATCs to conclude attempts in May 9 within four months.

PTI -Juridic Team is already expressing fear of the written order for its probable abuse against accused persons. Senior lawyers say it seems that SC did not learn the lesson from the Panama case, where the deadline was given to end the trials with the Sharif family. Later, the SC was blamed for giving relief to judge Sharif family members.

Previously, the Punjab prosecutor’s office presented a report in the Point Court, where it was told that a total of 319 FIRs were registered in various provinces Punjab. As many as 35,962 accused persons were nominated where 11,367 were arrested. 24,595 accused is largely. Final challenges are submitted in 307 cases.

The order notes that the Court has been informed that the accused respondents have in some cases been nominated in several FIRs, leading to litigation, which is pending of different courts against terrorism.

“Therefore, it may not be possible for them to act personally before all the courts, and therefore their applications for exemption should be considered in accordance with the law.

“Similarly, we have also been informed that the accused respondents have in some cases not delivered the copies of the charges and testimony of prosecution quarters who require them to prepare effective defense as injured in accordance with the statutory provisions of the law and Article 10-a of the Constitution.”

“This aspect of the case also requires attention from the courts of counter-terrorism. In addition, the complaints regarding the room for the courts of anti-terrorism should, if any, be considered by the respective head of the high courts and the administrative judges of the anti-terrorism ministers.”

For compliance with the instructions, the order said that the provincial commander of the judge, if they consider appropriate, may call each week report from anti-terrorism courts/administrative judges in the anti-terrorism courts to ensure that not only the case is implemented at any time in accordance.

However, this order must not exclude the prosecution from renewing its plea if any of the abuse of bail or non-cooperation from the defendant is brought to a record, as a result, the power of the law is to prevail, the order says.

In a comment on the order, the ex-birth minister Chaudhry Fawad Hussain says that the Supreme Court has in this case acted more as an administrative body rather than a judicial.

“Bottom rights?

Sameer Khosa, who was a lawyer for defendant persons, said the concern has always been that the defendants before the courts of anti-terrorism should receive a fair trial.

“The May 9 -The trials have clearly been used as a tool for political technique with those leaving a political party that is completely exempt from all charges. In this situation, it is clear that any independent and fair assessment in these cases will certainly free the many of the defendants.”

Khosa also states that a direction to end the attempts from the Supreme Court may tend to encourage anti-terrorism courts to trample over the accused’s rights by not giving sufficient time to cross investigate and put a defense. This was brought up to the Supreme Court, and one can only hope that the court courts as well as the high courts will implement the parts of the judgment categorically say that the accused rights are protected in every way, “says Sameer Khosa Advocate.