The court asked the medical board to submit a report containing, among other things, replies to questions. First, how precarious Musharraf's health condition was, which restricts his movements and prevents him from attending the court. Second, the court asked the board to state if he had undergone any surgery or other medical procedure during his stay in the hospital or if any surgery or medical procedure is planned? Third, the court asked the board to state how long he has been advised further hospitalization?
During the course of hearing, the bench turned down to the objections of defense counsel Anwar Mansoor Khan, observing, "principles laid down in Article 4 of Qanun-e-Shahdat Order 1984 are fully attracted and this court cannot be called upon to answer any question as to its own conduct in Court."
Ibrahim Satti, another counsel for Musharraf, apprised the bench that review petitions against the July 31, 2009 order of the apex court in response to Sindh High Court Bar Association had been filed in the Supreme Court. He pleaded that the petition had sought one of the remedies through a plea to grant stay to the proceedings related to high treason case against Musharraf before the Special Court.
Satti further contended that review petitions have been fixed for hearing on January 20 and sought adjournment of the Special Court proceedings in the instant matter. However, the bench recorded Satti's stance in its short order. Anwar Mansoor Khan submitted a statement that due to health condition of his client, it was not possible for him to attend the court saying Musharraf has not been discharged from the hospital where he continues to be under treatment.
Mansoor Khan further contended that Musharraf had earlier been under the treatment of Interventional Cardiology, Paris Regional Medical Center, Texas, USA, and he is being advised that he be transferred at the earliest to the said medical facility so that he is provided further diagnostic and therapeutic treatment. Khan also enclosed a letter of Arjumand Hashmi, the US-based doctor of Musharraf, with a statement which recommended that the patient immediately needed to be shifted to his facility for medical treatment.
Repeating his previous arguments Khan said that the appointment of the prosecutor has not been carried out in accordance with law, saying prosecutor cannot act as neutral person in the current matter.
Making the Special Court as a subject matter in his argument, Khan pleaded that it is well settled law that a matter of jurisdiction of a court must be decided when it is challenged before proceeding for any other issue, adding that where there is an allegation of bias or the litigant shows his reservation, the judge against whom such allegations are made should recuse himself in accordance with the principle of impartiality.
Khan asked once a prosecutor's appointment has been challenged, such a person cannot be allowed to act as a prosecutor. Referring to the assassination of SP CID Karachi Chaudhry Aslam, the defense counsel said that a bullet-proof car had been destroyed despite claims of security, asking how his client could be safe.
Prosecutor Akram Sheikh argued that the court summoned Musharraf six times but the accused did not appear before it which can be considered a contempt of the court. He further pleaded that courts do not wait for the accused and then quoted the example of Egypt's Hosni Mubarak who was brought to the court on a stretcher. Sheikh pleaded that the absence of a person is sufficient justification that he loses his right of audience, saying the accused is intentionally defying the orders of the Special Court so his counsel should not be heard more in the matter.
During proceedings, another member of the Musharraf's legal team complained that their client has been addressed as 'traitor'. Anwar Mansoor Khan meanwhile also told the court that even the prosecutor said on a television channel that the instant proceedings would take only three days and soon the accused would be hanged.
"The prosecutor is not a prosecutor but a persecutor," Anwar Mansoor Khan said, adding that still three applications were pending before the court: constitution of the bench, notification of the government, appointment of judges and the issue with regard to alleged bias of judges. He contended that the court should first hear all these three applications. "It's not a simple matter but an issue where the fundamental right of the respondent is involved," Mansoor said.
Prosecutor Akram Sheikh, however, told the bench that neither in the court nor on television, he had termed the accused a traitor, adding that if the allegations proved he would quit voluntarily from the case. The hearing of case was adjourned till Friday (today).