Musharraf Should Record His Statement Under Section 342 Treason Case: CJP
On Thursday, Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Mian Saqib Nisar directed former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf to record his statement under Section 342 of the criminal procedure code for the treason case charged against him. Moreover, Justice Nisar also approved Pervez to record his statement via Skype.
The chief justice’s declaration came as he led the case involving the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), passed by Musharraf in 2007.
As the hearing was completed, Musharraf’s counsel Akhtar Shah submitted a reply related to the former president’s return to the country and said, “I request the bench to keep my client’s illness confidential.”
Justice Nisar, however said, “There are people present in the country who are suffering with this disease.”
Musharraf’s lawyer then urged, “If it is necessary for Musharraf to return then he should be allowed to visit a doctor and his name should not be placed on the Exit Control List (ECL).”
To this, the chief justice assured, “Let Musharraf return to Pakistan, no one will arrest him but I cannot say anything regarding the removal of his name from ECL.”
“He should record his statement under Section 342 in the treason case. Dubai is not the best place for treatment and there are good doctors in Pakistan,” Justice Nisar said.
Musharraf’s lawyer then told the court that the former president was able to leave the country after getting permission from the government. However, the chief justice said, “We are saying it again, we did not grant permission to Musharraf.”
Further, he stated, “We cannot put anyone’s life at risk. Musharraf should come record his statement and whenever he wants to leave for treatment he can.”
With Musharraf, Zardari and Qayyum being the respondents, petitioner Feroz Shah Gilani requested the court in April to order recovery of ‘huge amounts of public money’ which was misappropriated and wasted by these politicians through unlawful means and are ‘already on record in different judgments of the Supreme Court and high court’.