Special Court rejects Musharraf plea, seeking documents on 2007 emergency

ISLAMABAD: The special court conducting the treason trial of former military ruler Pervez Musharraf dismissed his plea seeking documents pertaining to the November 2007 emergency.

Special court registrar Abdul Ghani Soomro read out the detailed verdict which was earlier been reserved.

Rejecting the plea, the court ruled that though it was right of the accused to seek evidence, Musharraf’s plea was premature.

The court said that the accused himself could get the verified copies of the documents from the departments concerned. The court will consider the accused application during the course of hearing if he needed evidence.

The special court said the documents were public property.

Special operations forces may get 'Iron Man' suit

TAMPA: In the 2008 movie "Iron Man," the main character becomes a superhero after building a suit of armor with an exoskeleton that gives him incredible strength.

Today, elite U.S. special operations forces may be a few short years away from donning a similar suit, one that can monitor the user's vital signs, give him real-time battlefield information and be bulletproof from head to toe. The suit might eventually have other features unheard of only a few years ago, including an exoskeleton made of liquid armor, smart fabrics that could help stop hemorrhaging, enhanced sensory capabilities and Google Glass-like visuals.

The Tactical Assault Light Operator Suit (TALOS) project is coordinated through the Special Operations Command headquarters at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa. Prototypes are expected to be shown to military commanders in June, with hopes that the suit will be given to high-risk units in 2018.

While the project sounds like something out of a science fiction novel, its mission is simple, said James Geurts, the Deputy for Acquisition of the U.S. Special Operations Command at MacDill.

"We've lost a lot of guys to gunshot wounds and explosions," he said. "If there's anything I can do to more rapidly field technology, give better protection, better capability, any progress, I think we've done well."

Some companies working on the TALOS project are in Tampa this week for the International Special Operations Forces conference. The four-day event showcases special military technologies, gadgets and tools - from pen-like systems collecting chemical vapors to underwater robots. Several top analysts and military brass are also scheduled to speak, including SOCOM commander, Adm. William McRaven.

McRaven is widely credited with initiating the TALOS project. Last year, he described SOCOM's unique approach to the project: By harnessing the expertise of professional engineers, the creativity of students and possibly even "local garage tinkerers," the military will end up with a truly innovative project.

"I am very committed to it because I'd like that last operator we lost to be the last one we ever lose in this fight or the fight of the future, and I think we can get there," McRaven said last July.

What might be more remarkable than the whiz-bang technology of the suit is how Geurts and his team are reaching out to recruit contractors in non-traditional ways.

SOCOM has held "Monster Garage"-type events for people with potential ideas, and even Geurts acknowledged: "It's certainly not the traditional Department of Defense model."

"Looking for #collaborators to help #invent the next generation of #sof combat gear via #talos @SOFTALOS," Geurts tweeted in September.

Frost & Sullivan Aerospace and Defense Senior Industry Analyst Brad Curran said this approach is novel for the military.

"A trend of toward seeking more academic and industry input is picking up as DoD seeks to save research and development funds, shorten acquisition schedules, and leverage commercial technology," said Curran.

The biggest current challenge is making the suit light and comfortable for the soldier.

"For every pound the operator has to carry in armor, there's an additional energy supply," said Dan Stamm, a research scientist at Battelle, an Ohio-based defense contractor that's the lead contracting consultant on the TALOS project.

Dan Rini, president of Rini Tech in Orlando, is one of the contractors on the project. His company has made a "personal thermal protection system" for the military that runs off a 3 1/2-pound battery and uses cold water and tubes to keep people cool.

Rini said he's trying to adapt that invention to the TALOS suit.

"We don't want that person inside the suit to get overcome by heat stress," Rini said "He might have to be in it for a long time."

Michael Fieldson , the civilian TALOS project manager, said the battery pack for the cooling system and the exoskeleton present the biggest weight hurdles.

"Nature did a pretty good job of designing the human body and we're trying to mimic that," said Fieldson. "Hollywood did a pretty good job of showing us what Iron Man could do on the screen, and the system may do some of those things - but we're not planning on flying."

Whether the suit is adopted by special operations forces, even in part, will remain to be seen, said Curran. He suggested that partial exoskeletons to help ease the strain on solder's knees would be likely used first.

"It is more likely that certain aspects of the suit research will be applied incrementally, rather than a complete rollout all at once," he said. "Integrated helmets with communications, night vision, and heads-up visor displays that are used by pilots may be deployed by ground troops as well. Lighter weight and less bulky body armor with better ballistic protection is needed by all. I think at least some aspects of the research will be applied in the near future."

 

Special court reserves judgment on Musharraf’s plea seeking FIA inquiry report

 

ISLAMABAD: The Special Court hearing the high treason case on Friday reserved the decision on the accused Pervez Musharraf’s plea seeking copies of the inquiry and investigation report of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) regarding the action taken on November 3, 2007.
A three-member Special Court, headed by Justice Faisal Arab and comprising Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali, resumed hearing in the high treason case against former military dictator General (retd) Pervez Musharaf for imposing the emergency rule in the country on November 3, 2007.

Continuing his arguments in rebuttal to the prosecution, Barrister Farogh Naseem, counsel for Pervez Musharraf, questioned as to whether the court and prosecution did not want that the instant trial should be conducted in a fair manner, adding that in order to ensure a fair trial, all the material including inquiry and investigation report of the Federal Investigation Agency had to be provided to the accused so that he could plead his case effectively.

The learned counsel contended that if all this material was not provided to the accused, then the trial could be restarted. He further submitted that the investigation report of FIA does not fall in the ambit of the Official Secrets Act that could be concealed from the defence.

At this, Dr Tariq Hassan from the prosecution side told the court that the investigation report of FIA does fall in the ambit of the Official Secrets Act and that was why it was being kept secret.

Justice Faisal Arab, however, observed that if the investigation report was secret, it would not have been released to the media.Farogh Naseem further contended that he was not asking the investigation report of FIA only but also seeking the whole record pertaining to the instant case, adding that without these, there would not be a fair trial.

He requested the court to issue directives for providing all the record pertaining to the case to the accused so that he could plead the case in an effective manner.Meanwhile, the court reserved the decision on the application and adjourned the hearing till April 28. The court ruled that it would take up other two applications, filed by the accused including seeking the trial of other persons under Article 6 of the Constitution who advised the accused to impose the emergency rule on November 3, 2007.

Only Musharraf proclaimed emergency, special court told

 

ISLAMABAD: The prosecution in the high treason case on Wednesday told the Special Court that former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf in his personal capacity proclaimed the emergency rule on Nov 3, 2007 as no record pertaining to summary or advice was available at the Prime Minister’s House proving that former prime minister Shaukat Aziz had advised the president in this regard.
A three-member Special Court, headed by Justice Faisal Arab and comprising Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali, resumed hearing into the Federation’s appeal for initiating the treason trial against the former military dictator General (retd) Pervez Musharraf for subverting the Constitution on Nov 3, 2007.

Prosecutor Muhammad Akram Sheikh submitted his written reply on the defence application, seeking the trial of all the abettors under the treason charges and a copy of the investigation report conducted by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA).

He contended that so far in the investigation conducted in the instant case, it was found that the accused Pervez Musharraf issued the order of emergency rule in his personal capacity, adding that it was the responsibility of the accused to provide evidence against the other officials mentioned in the order of emergency rule.

The learned prosecutor further submitted that the incumbent government was unaware of the advisers of the accused at the time of issuing the proclamation of emergency rule, adding that the accused could better tell the court as to who were his advisers.

Justice Faisal Arab asked the prosecutor if the accused wanted to have a glimpse of the investigation report conducted by the FIA for his defence, adding as to why the accused should be deprived of this right.

“Whether was it not necessary to provide the investigation report to the court and the accused as well?” Justice Faisal Arab further asked Akram Sheikh.Akram Sheikh replied that the court could summon the report but it could not be provided to the accused. He said that the accused could only seek a statement when produced as evidence against him.

The learned prosecutor submitted that the Ministry of Interior was a part of the government and, according to the Constitution; the interior secretary was the competent authority to file a complaint in the treason case. He further contended that under articles 9, 10 and 19, it was the responsibility of the state to initiate the trial against a person for violation of the Constitution.

He submitted that in the treason case, a person would be tried against whom solid evidence was found adding that everything was based on solid evidence. The learned prosecutor told the court that the accused could file an application with interior secretary telling the names of abettors and requesting for taking action against them and placing their names in the list of the accused.

He further said that the defence counsel had asked for the statement of one of the members of FIA team and the said member would also be produced as evidence, hence in such a situation, a copy of the investigation report could not be provided yet.

He pleaded that defence applications seeking the trial of the abettors in the matter was aimed at diverting the attention of the court from the instant case, hence it should be dismissed.Meanwhile, Farogh Naseem, counsel for Pervez Musharraf, sought time till April 24 saying that he had not yet read all the material regarding the case while some books on international laws were lying in his office in Karachi. Similarly, he said that as he got the reply of the prosecution late, hence he could not made preparation for his arguments.

At this, the court accepted his plea and adjourned the hearing till April 24, ruling that the hearing would be held on daily basis from April 24.The court will also announce on April 18 (tomorrow) verdict on the defence application challenging the appointment of Akram Sheikh as prosecutor in the treason case.

Special Court resumes treason case hearing against Musharraf

ISLAMABAD: The Special Court has resumed the hearing of high treason case against former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf after the interval of two weeks on Tuesday, Geo News reported.

A three-member special court headed by Justice Faisal Arab and consisting of Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali Khan is hearing the case against the former dictator in the premises of Federal Shariat Court instead of National Liberary due to security concerns.

During today’s proceedings, Justice Faisal Arab said that Musharraf’s lawyer Anwar Mansoor Advocate had accused Prosecutor Akram Sheikh of being biased, and the verdict in that regard will be announced on April 18.

Earlier on March 31, the court had exempted Musharraf from personal appearance, saying that it could not restrict one’s free movement until the accused was arrested.

Also, the Special Court had indicted Pervez Musharraf on five counts of high treason, a charge that potentially carries death penalty.

The first charge was that Musharraf abrogated the Constitution by slapping emergency on November 3, 2007 and trampled fundamental human rights.

The second charge stated that he introduced illegal amendments to the Constitution between November 20 and December 14, 2007 which was an unconstitutional act.

The third charge was that he issued the PCO illegally, forced the superior court judges to take oath under it and removed those who did not take oath.

The fourth charge was that the accused removed those judges who did not take oath under the PCO and put them under house arrest. The fifth charge related to the imposition of the November 3, 2007 emergency and holding the Constitution in abeyance.

The accused denied all the charges against him and pleaded not guilty.

Musharraf’s counsels decide to boycott special court

ISLAMABAD: A team of counsels defending the former military ruler General (reted) Pervez Musharraf in treason case have decided to boycott the proceedings of the special court.

According to the sources, the decision was taken as Justice Faisal Arab would continue to hear the treason case.

The sources said Musharraf counsels are of the view that Justice Faisal Arab had decided to dissociate himself from the hearing.

The counsels claimed that Justice Faisal Arab’s remarks against Anwar Mansoor are unnecessary and against the facts, the sources added.

Musharraf leaves AFIC for special court

ISLAMABAD: Former president Pervez Musharraf has at last left the Armed Forces Institute of Cardiolgy (AFIC)for appearance in the special court as against the earlier report that his BP suddenly shot up, shifted to the ICU and there was 50/50 chance of his appearance in the court, Geo News reported Monday morning.

Musharraf’s chance of appearing in Special Court 50/50: Kasuri

ISLAMABAD: The counsel of former president General (retired) Pervez Musharraf, Ahmad Raza Kasuri Sunday said that the chances of his client appearing in the special court tomorrow (Monday) was 50/50, Geo News reported.

Talking to Geo News here, Ahmad Raza Kasuri said that a situation of confrontation might arise if not handled wisely and added any sort of confrontation could be harmful to democracy.

Responding to a question, he said that the chances of Pervez Musharraf appearing tomorrow in the special court was 50/50.

Special Court upholds order to summon Musharraf

 

ISLAMABAD: The Special Court on Thursday upheld its previous order regarding the summoning of former President General (retd) Pervez Musharraf for indictment on March 31 and the non-bailable arrest warrant in the high treason case.
Earlier in the morning, Justice Faisal Arab, heading the three-member Special Court, walked out of the courtroom after the defence counsel expressed their no-confidence in the court. The court ruled that the verdict would be announced during the course of the day.

After Justice Faisal Arab left the courtroom along with other judges, it was widely reported by the electronic media that he had recused himself from hearing the treason case against the former military dictator.

However, it has been made clear that Justice Faisal Arab has not detached himself from the case, according to the written verdict issued on Thursday afternoon.Later in the afternoon, Registrar of the Special Court Abdul Ghani Somoro announced a three-page order, stating that Justice Faisal Arab rose for the day only and would continue to head the bench and proceed with the treason case against the accused, Pervez Musharraf.

The short order ruled that Justice Faisal Arab rose for the day due to the offensive attitude adopted by Anwar Mansoor, counsel for the accused, during the day’s proceeding of the instant case.

“The conduct of Anwar Mansoor Khan did not demonstrate the level of decency towards the court which is expected from a senior counsel,” the short order said adding that disgusted by such an attitude, the court rose for the day.

The court upheld its earlier order of March 14, issuing a non-bailable warrant for Pervez Musharraf and summoning him on March 31 for his indictment.The court, therefore, dismissed the criminal miscellaneous application, filed by the accused, seeking rectification of the order of March 14, 2014, and virtually seeking a review of the said order.

“Let the matter come for hearing on March 31, 2014, for appearance of the accused and reading of the charge,” the short order ruled on Thursday.The decision of Justice Faisal Arab to continue as head of the Special Court, however, surprised the legal team of the accused that apparently looked quite relaxed after the morning’s proceedings of the case.

“Today’s verdict is contrary to the facts and realities and the statements attributed to Advocate Anwar Mansoor are not correct as our objection was strictly within the legal bounds of law,” said Faisal Chaudhry, a counsel for Pervez Musharraf.

He said that the defence team held courts in high esteem but at the same time expected the courts to proceed within the parameters of law.“To raise objections is legal right of the defence team, and it will be carried out in future as well,” he told The News.

Earlier, during the hearing of the instant case, Anwar Mansoor Khan commenced his arguments on the criminal miscellaneous application, seeking rectification of the order of March 14, 2014.

He submitted that he did not, at any stage, state that the accused did not intend to appear before the court, rather he submitted that the accused was not able to appear on account of the security concerns as highlighted by the Ministry of Interior in its letter of March 10, 2014.He said that even the court had also realised the security concerns on that day; hence, there was no justification of issuing non-bailable warrant of the accused.

“Issuance of non-bailable warrant is not a joke,” Anwar Mansoor said, adding that the court had given exemption to the accused from appearing before the court on that day; therefore, non-bailable warrant of the accused ought not to have been issued.

Anwar Mansoor further contended that he never suggested that the charge could not be read out to the counsel for the accused as the same was alien to the Criminal Procedure Code and the same was wrongly incorporated in the order.

The counsel for the accused maintained that he had been misquoted in the order of March 14, 2014.The court, however, observed that the impugned order was clear and did not admit to any ambiguity so as to warrant any rectification or modification. The court further ruled that the accused if aggrieved by the order of March 14, 2014, could have impugned the same before the court of competent jurisdiction.

Meanwhile, when Muhammad Akram Sheikh, Prosecutor, started arguing in rebuttal, Anwar Mansoor Khan interrupted the proceedings and did not allow Muhammad Akram Sheik to continue with his arguments as decision on the application for debarring him to act as a prosecutor in the instant case had already been reserved.

Justice Faisal Arab, however, told the defence counsel that till such time a decision was rendered regarding impartiality or otherwise of Muhammad Akram Sheikh, he could address the court.

Justice Faisal Arab also reminded Anwar Mansoor Khan that it had already been ordered that the matter of competence or otherwise of Muhammad Akram Sheikh would definitely be decided before recording of the evidence.

Anwar Mansoor Khan, however, kept interrupting and insinuating that he had no confidence in the court and questioned the manner adopted by the court while passing its orders.Justice Faisal Arab reminded Anwar Mansoor Khan time and again that he was an officer of the court and ought to have desisted from behaving in a manner unbecoming of a counsel.

He further reminded Anwar Mansoor Khan if he was aggrieved by the order of the court, he had every right to impugn the same before a court of competent jurisdiction.Anwar Mansoor Khan, however, continued to express no confidence in the court. “We are not comfortable the way the court is conducting the proceedings,” he said.

Meanwhile, when the defence counsel repeatedly expressed no confidence in the court, Justice Faisal Arab said that he could not proceed further with the instant proceedings and rose, saying that there was no dearth of judges and left the court room.

Birthday Special: Aamir Khan's MOST popular dialogues

As Aamir Khan turns 49 on March 14, we look at some of  his most popular dialogues over the years.

Aamir Khan has a way with words.

Whether he’s proposing to his ladylove on screen, selling a can of Coke or guilt tripping us into waking up early on a Sunday morning to catch his social chat show, Satymev Jayate, there’s simply no ignoring the star of record-breaking blockbusters like Ghajini, 3 Idiots and Dhoom 3.

Bollywood’s most reliable celebrity turns 49 on March 14. And we’re celebrating the occasion by listing 15 of his most memorable movie lines. Don’t forget to share your favourites in the message board below.

Dhoom 3

'Circus-wala hoon, sirf aankhon ko nahi maut ko dhoka dete hoon. Roz.'

Aamir Khan checkmates his unsuspecting opponent during Dhoom 3’s pre-climatic twist with smug logic that’s hard to beat, especially when the guy at the receiving end happens to be Abhishek Bachchan.

Special court to announce verdict on Musharraf’s petitions on Friday

ISLAMABAD: The special court trying former president Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf in high treason case, Wednesday announced that it would announce verdict in three petitions of defence counsel regarding competence of the court to initiate proceedings, its formation and alleged bias of judges.

The three-member special court resumed hearing of the treason case.

During the course of proceedings, head of prosecution team, Akram Sheikh sought permisssion for offering Fateha for judges, lawyers and other people, who had become victim of Islamabad district courts' terrorist attack. Fateha was offered on the court's permission.

Defence counsel Anwar Mansoor Khan informed the court that after the terrorist attack, Pervaiz Musharraf and his lawyers were feeling insecure to appear in the court.

Then Ahmed Raza Kasuri, another consel for Musharraf, informed the court that he had received a letter from Taliban to desist himself, Anwar Mansoor Khan and Sharifuddin Pirzada from pursuing the case.

He said they would file two applications seeking sine die (indefinitely) adjournment of case on ground of deteriorated security situation.

Rana Ijaz Ahmed Khan despite being stopped by the court, alleged that the terrorists had planned to kill all three judges, the head of prosecution and two of the defence lawyers.

Akram Sheikh said the terrorist threat should not be glorified to subjugate and surrender the judges and lawyers commitment to perform their obligation of administration of justice.

He said that he would ensure that the terrorists were defeated by continuing the proceedings.

He was asked by the court to take instructions from his client with regard to security measures after the unfortunate episode of Monday.

Justice Faisal Arab observed that whether there was any threat or not, they were under obligation as judges of high court and bound by the oath to continue acting without fear or favour. They could not pack up files and adjourn the case indefinitely, he added.

He said they were willing to adjourn for today and would announce an order on the objections raised by the defence lawyers.