ISLAMABAD: Former president retired Gen Pervez Musharraf submitted his reply to the Supreme Court in the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) case in which he claimed that he promulgated NRO to put an end to the acrimonious relations between political parties leading to the political vengeance in the country then.
Former military dictator stipulated that the NRO 2007 was implemented by him as then president in the national interest of Pakistan in order to improve the revengeful political conditions prevailing then.
The objective behind NRO 2007, devoid of any vested interests, was to foster trust among the public office holders, Musharraf’s response mentioned.
Legal counsel of Pervez Musharraf submitted his client’s response to the apex court.
Former president Asif Ali Zardari in his response in NRO case stressed before the Supreme Court that he had not played any role in the making of the National Reconciliation Order (NRO).
Pakistan Peoples Party co-chairman stated in his answer that in 2007, the permission to withdraw cases against him was granted under NRO, however cases were reopened after the court overruled the law.
Zardari’s response asserted that he was acquitted in criminal cases by the court, whereas the allegations of looting or damaging the national exchequer were also not proven against him.
It was contended in the rejoinder of Zardari that political opponents had filed false cases against him in order to malign him and his party.
The case
Petitioner Feroz Shah Gilani filed a petition in the Supreme Court nominating Pervez Musharraf, Asif Ali Zardari and former attorney general Malik Abdul Qayyum as respondents in the case.
The petitioner appealed that apex court should recover ‘huge amount of public money’ embezzled by the respondents through unlawful means ‘already on record in different judgments of the Supreme Court and high courts’.
The petition held Musharraf accountable for subverting the Constitution and promulgating the NRO through which criminal and corruption cases against politicians were ‘arbitrarily withdrawn’ causing massive financial losses to the national exchequer.
Leave a Comment