ISLAMABAD, Dec 19 (APP):The Special Court constituted to trial former president Pervez Musharraf under high treason on Thursday announced the detailed verdict in the case.

The three-member Special Court headed by Justice Waqar Ahmed Seth and comprising Justice Nazar Akbar and Justice Shahid Karim released the 169-page detailed judgement, which included dissenting notes by all the judges.

The judgment authored by Justice Waqar Ahmed Seth stated: “The usurpation of the functions of government and other organs of State established by the Constitution (is) tantamount to subversion of the Constitution. Exercise of undue influence over judiciary [such as making them cease office and/or take fresh extra-constitutional oath] do tantamount to subversion of the Constitution.”

“The trial of high treason is the requirement of the Constitution against those individuals who undermine or attempt to undermine the Constitution by any means. This court after presentation of undeniable, irrefutable and unimpeachable evidence by the prosecution against the accused reaches to the conclusion that indeed the accused is guilty and deserves exemplary punishment.”

Justice Karim did not support paragraph 68 of the main order. “Indeed, this portion of the judgment and execution of the sentence is nowhere defined but since it is first impression case and the sentence of death is announced in his absence after declaring the convict as proclaimed offender therefore the sentence is supposed to be executed and in case of his death a sentence, to this extent para 65 prescribes the mode of execution.”

The verdict added,“It would be in the interest of justice that all those involved (if any) in facilitation of the escape of the fugitive accused may also be brought in the net of due course of law and their criminal acts (if any) may be investigated and tried in accordance with law.”

The judgment ordered to keep the record inclusive of the case properties under lock and key with the registrar of the court till further orders.

Justice Nazar Akbar pointed out that the definition of high treason was updated after passage of the 18th Constitutional Amendment in 2010, which, he said, was not intended to be applied retrospectively.

Justice Akbar viewed that Musharraf’s actions of imposing emergency on November 3, 2007, could not be seen as “attracting provisions of Article 6 of the Constitution” on the said date.

“Counsel has failed to appreciate that on the date of offence except ‘abrogate’ and ‘subvert’ no other act of any person was considered as an offence under Article 6 of the Constitution.

Only the act of ‘abrogation’ and ‘subversion’ of Constitution was considered as an act of high treason. The words ‘suspension’ and ‘abeyance’ were not used in the language of Article 6 of the Constitution until 20.4.2010 when [they] were introduced through the 18th Amendment almost after two and a half year to the date of alleged offence of high treason.

“In the offence under Article 6 of the Constitution, the charging word is ‘high treason’, therefore, without properly appreciating what does it mean, this court cannot pass a just and fair verdict.

“But for this reason, both the learned counsel for the prosecution and my learned brothers have referred to the definition of ‘high treason’ by relying on the meaning of ‘high treason’ given in the Oxford Dictionary (Tenth Edition).”

Justice Seth and Justice Karim gave the death sentence while Justice Nazarullah Akbar wrote a dissenting note saying that the prosecution team could not prove the treason case.