SOME FAMOUS TRIALS OF IMPORTANT PERSONALITIES

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad once said, So far the biggest excesses and victimisation have been purpetrated in the witness boxes of the courts?. Addressing a court as a an accused he told a judge,? You do your work and we are doing our and let the history write the judgement.? History bears witness to the fact that the government of the British disappeared and the names of the judges became extinct but those who appeared before them are still alive as indestructible milestones in history. In the known history prophet Jesus was the first ?accused? whom a Roman court sentenced to death on the basis of a unilateral and prejudiced decision. The court, its judges, members of Jury and the prosecutors all have vanished but the name of Jesus Christ still shines in the annals of history. Today for the interest of readers we want to discuss some renowned cases which became known in the world due to their political and social importance and history shall not erase them for years to come. The case of Jesus Christ is sanctified in the history and is also referred in the holiest book of the world Quran AlHakim. From the known history one finds that another case was also presented in a Greek court in which certain accusations were levelled against Socrates But Socrates claimed that he was reforming the society and disseminating new ideas to the younger generation in order to keep them abreast with the demands of the new times. But the people in authority of that period were opposed to Socrates? teachings, his philosophy and dissemination of knowledge. He was told that he deserved capital punishment. Either he should tender apology or drink a cup of hemlock poison. His friends and pupils advised him to ask for forgiveness so that he could remain with them. But Socrates said that by drinking a cup of poison he would apparently die but in the pages of history he would live forever for his ideas, thoughts and philosophy. His decision was not wrong. Socrates eternally lives in history with his ideas, thoughts and philosophy.

One of the famous cases is the one proceeded against the British King Edward VIII in the parliament. He had fallen in love with an American widow Mrs Simpson and wanted to marry her. According to British traditions and practice the King could not marry a widow. But the British King was insisting that for him love was more important than the British crown. The parliament tried to pressurise him telling him that he was King of an Empire where sun would never set and at that time British power was at its zenith. He was told therefore that bowing to the traditions associated with the British crown he should close the chapter of his love. But Edward accepted the loss of crown and gave up the kingship of Britain and married Mrs Simpson. The details of his prosecution and his decision were widely read and heard in the world. His case was of great interest to the public and even today it has special importance.

In 1962 long-drawn legal proceedings were initiated against the Turkish premier Adnan Mendres which were widely published in the world media. Ultimately he was sentenced to death. He was tried for various charges. Today no body remembers the names of the judges or the charges brought against him but Adnan Menderes? name would live for ever. In 1973-74 American President Richard Nixon was charged for installing bugging devices in the headquarters of the opposition party at ?Water Gate? to find out their secrets. It is said that Richard Nixon had full knowledge of this bugging but again and again denied it. The evidence however proved that he was lying. The American public thought that they could not tolerate a liar as their President and Richard Nixon who was elected as President for the second term bowed before the verdict of the people and resigned from his eminent position. A wave of protest spread in India when the most popular Prime Minister of India Mrs Indira Gandhi enforced emergency in the country and she miserably lost in the general elections. She who remained Prime Minister for 16 years was proceeded against in the court of an ordinary magistrate .The proceedings of this trial were flashed in the newspapers of the world and the magistrate sentenced her to imprisonment for forfeiting the democratic rights of the people. The incident was given wide coverage by the world press. After remaining in jail for a few days she was released and after two and a half years she again became the Prime Minister of India.

On 4th April 1979, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the ex-President,the ex- Prime Minister and the first civilian Chief Martial Law Administrator of Pakistan was hanged. The then Martial law government had dug out an old first information report (FIR) which had been registered in connection with the murder of Mohammad AhmadKhan Qasuri. The charge was that Mr Bhutto had conspired with the officials of the Federal Security Force(FSF) to kill one of his party members in the national assembly named Ahmad Raza Qasuri. In Lahore?s Shadman Colony when Mr Qasuri along with his family members was coming back after attending a marriage party he was attacked by the functionaries of FSF. He himself escaped unhurt but his father came in the range of firing and died on the spot. Mr Qasuri who was a lawyer by profession and a member of the national assembly got a first information report registered in Ichra police station that this murderous attack on him was carried out under the instructions of the Prime Minister in which his father died. A few other names were also implicated in the FIR. After registering the report police sealed it and when Bhutto was removed as the Prime Minister and People party?s government came to an end and Martial law was imposed in the country by General Ziaulhaq, the case was re-opened. After preliminary investigations the case was presented before a Lahore High Court bench consisting of five judges. According to routine this case should have first gone before a magistrate and then a session judge but high court has authority to carry out the session trial of an extraordinary case itself. That is why the acting Chief Justice of the high court Moulvi Mushtaq Husain instituted a full bench under his own chairmanship and began the trial.

The lawyers of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto took the plea that they did not have confidence in the full bench particularly in its chairman Moulvi Mushtaq because he had personal wrangle against Mr Bhutto but Moulvi Mushtaq turned down all the objections raised against the bench and decided to continue the hearing himself. Upon this Mr Bhutto boycotted the proceedings and instructed his lawyers to stop pleading the case. The honourable court upon this ordered Mr Bhutto?s lawyers to continue pleading the case as defence lawyers at state expenses. Interestingly it was for the first time in its history that the court had ordered the tape recording of the proceedings of a case. The recording button was with Moulvi Mushtaq and only that part was recorded which he deemed fit for recording. For first time in a court of law the new terminology of principal accused was used for Mr Bhutto and a special booth was made for the principal accused and Mr Bhutto was supposed to sit in that special box and was not allowed to talk to any one without permission of the special court nor was he allowed to give any instructions to his lawyers. On this Mr Bhutto lodged a strong protest but it was rejected by the court. A part of the cross examination and his statement on certain special subjects were recorded in camera and People Party?s protests against it were also rejected.

The proceedings of this case were started in September 1977 and on 18th March 1978 the Lahore High Court announced death sentences for the former Prime Minister Mr Bhutto and the other four accused officers of FSF involved in firing. An appeal against the judgement was lodged in the Supreme Court. Mr Bhutto was given the opportunity to appear before the Supreme Court himself. He stated that he had full confidence in the court and if they sentenced him to death he would accept their verdict. During the course of proceedings one judge retired reaching superannuation and the other was removed from service because of his illness. Thus the bench comprising nine judges was reduced to seven judges. The Supreme Court in March 1979 upheld the death sentence awarded by the High court. Out of seven judges three judges disagreeing with verdict of the High Court ordered Mr Bhutto?s acquittal while four judges upheld the death sentence. All the four judges upholding the judgement belonged to Punjab while among the three dissenting judges two were from Sindh and one was from Frontier Province.

The former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka Mr Justice Raja Ratnam has written a book on Mr Bhutto?s trial which is named ?Judiciary In Crisis?. In his book Raja Ratnam has discussed every aspect of the judgement and after analysing the trial, its proceedings, and the arguments of prosecution and defence teams has expressed his dissatisfaction on the performance of prosecution and defence lawyers and has stated that during the proceeding bench had ignored many facts and the proceedings of the trial were not conducted in accordance with the legal requirements. He also expressed his dissatisfaction over the performance of defence team who, according to his presumption ,were under immense pressure of the honourable court. He has also analysed the attitude of the judges of the Supreme Court. The bench consisting of nine judges was reduced to seven and here also the decision of the four judges was tainted in political colour although they knew it fully well that it was a trial for murder and the punishment would not be less than death sentence to a single individual or seven persons . Therefore it it was imperative to pay more attention to this trial. (Part One of Twentieth Chapter)Since Supreme Court is not bound by any rules and regulations to provide justice therefore the Supreme Court was supposed to look into the shortcomings and weaknesses of the high court judgement but it was not done. Rather Supreme Court could order that another bench should hold the proceedings again but Supreme Court did not bother to have a fresh look at the judgement of High Court. Raja Ratnam has therefore disagreed with the decision of the Supreme Court of upholding the death sentence of Mr Bhutto. The legal experts and human rights activists from around the globe came to Pakistan to watch the proceedings of Mr Bhutto?s trial. They severely criticised the judgement and the attitude of judges and even today this judgement is regarded as a doubtful judgement.

In 1982-83 in Iran the young, intelligent, highly educated and an excellent orator of international repute Dr Sadiq Qutabzadeh was put on trial for treason. Dr Qutabzadeh lived in exile in France with Imam Khomnieni for a long time.He was considered as his special pupil and worked as his spokesman. Suddenly the proceedings began against him that he was an American C.I.A. agent. The trial ran for a long time which was being heard by a revolutionary court of Iran. The proceedings of this case were reported by the newspapers through out the world. The governments from all over the world appealed for clemency for Qutabzadeh but on the order of the revolutionary court he was executed by shooting. During the same period former Prime Minister Amir Abbas Hovaida was also tried for treason. Hovaida held the portfolio of education and other ministries in the cabinet of Shah of Iran for nearly twenty five years and then remained Prime Minister for twelve years. It is said about him that he was the Professor of International Relations and Political Science in the University of Tehran before joining the cabinet and even as Prime Minister when ever he was present in Tehran he would make it a point to go to the University and teach the students. It is said in Iranian circles that he was a man of clean and impeccable character. He contributed a lot to the promotion of higher education in Iran. During the reign of Shah of Iran he tried his best to make education universal and inexpensive for the common man. Today the high standard of education and literacy in Iran is owing to his hard work.

The revolutionary government had only one objection against Amir Abbas Hovaida that he was opposing the revolution by associating with the counter-revolutionary forces. The proceedings of the trial of Amir Abbas Hovaida were published by the newspapers through out the world and the leaders of the world appealed for granting him clemency against the death sentence but the Irani government acted upon the decision thus denying a very knowledgeable personality the right to live. but his name will eternally remain in history and in the list of knowledgeable personalities.

In 1997 it was revealed that President Clinton of America had developed relations with a White House internee and a beautiful Jewish girl named Monica Levinsky and he was giving her gifts and presents and both of them were enjoying in the Oval Office of the White House. As the statements from different circles appeared in the press and allegations were levelled she was relieved of her position in the White House. When too much hue and cry was raised by the American Press the American Law department appointed a lawyer as the judge of a special court and handed him the case. This court appointed a special prosecutor to investigate and procure evidence for the prosecution and started its proceedings. This was undoubtedly a unique and strange case which exposed the new culture and social structure of Europe and America. The powerful people of American administration specially the American President stood exposed of their immoral tendencies and the lawyers proved it that the President was involved with a woman in an indecent manner. There are many aspects of this case but the most serious aspect is that morally American society is at its lowest ebb and even the biggest American leader has no moral standard. But at the same time it also showed the whole world that the reason for American domination over the world is that the administration of justice is very strong in that country. In spite of their immorality and dishonesty they are still maintaining the process of accountability in a free and transparent manner. The practical manifestation of this was given by the personal appearance of Mr Clinton along with his lawyer in the court when summoned by the presiding judge of this temporary court. He was cross examined for two days for six to seven hours at a stretch in which he confessed that he had relations with Monica. Due to this confession by President Clinton the American public forgave him and the President apologised to the nation through television and newspapers.

In 1998 the renowned Malaysian economic expert Dr Anwar Ibrahim was arrested and was tried for moral and monetary corruption. Anwar Ibrahim is till in one of Malaysia?s prisons. The world media has shown extraordinary interest in his trial and so much has been published in the world press about him so far that many books can be compiled. This also shows that the whole world is watching each step of his trial and no injustice can be perpetrated against him. At the end we talk about the proceedings of the case instituted against the former Prime Minister of Pakistan Mohammad Nawaz Sharif known as Plane Hijacking case. The basis of this case are the orders of the former Prime Minister issued concerning the landing of the plane carrying the Pakistan Army?s Chief of Staff and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff General Parvez Musharraf at Karachi airport. The plea of the former Prime Minister and his legal advisers is that he never gave such orders but the prosecution has made many senior officials as witnesses who were in senior positions at the time of occurrence of the incident. They have held the Prime Minister responsible for giving the orders. This trial is the centre of interest for millions of the people round the world because on this depends the future of Pakistani politics.

Although the nature of this case against Nawaz Sharif is different but there are some similarities between this case and that of another former Prime Minister of Pakistan Mr Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.
1. Like Mr Nawaz Sharif , Mr Bhutto was also far removed from the place of incident.
2. The allegation against Mr Bhutto was that he had conspired with officers of FSF to murder Ahmad Raza Kasuri. In this case also the allegation against Nawaz Sharif is that he conspired with the officials of civil aviation to stop the landing of General Mushrraf?s plane at airport and therefore caused danger to the lives of General Musharraf as well as the plane staff and the passengers.
3. The approver in Bhutto case was the director general of FSF Masud Mahmud while in this case it is Nawaz Sharif?s favourite high official Amin Ullah Choudhry.
4. During his case they used to bring Mr Bhutto to the court under strict security conditions, similarly Nawaz Sharif is brought for trial under more stringent security arrangements.
5. Just as the army was acting against the supporters of Mr Bhutto similarly the government is now proceeding against Nawaz loyalists.
6. Just as the world leaders and political personalities were applying pressure on Ziaulhaq for clemency to Mr Bhutto similarly important people from around the world are appealing for clemency and pardon to Nawaz Sharif.