Supreme Court Refers Arshad Sharif Murder Case Back to Three-Judge Committee

Islamabad: On Monday, the Supreme Court referred journalist Arshad Sharif’s murder case back to a three-judge committee established under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023. This was to schedule it again before a five-judge bench.

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, leading a three-judge bench, pointed out that the case was being heard by a smaller bench even though a five-judge bench had previously handled it.

Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar were part of the original larger bench. Justice Shah mentioned that the case would be scheduled again once these two judges are available.

Former Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial had started the suo motu proceedings into Arshad Sharif’s killing in Kenya.

On Monday, Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan informed the court that a draft of the Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) request, meant to seek help from Kenyan authorities to access suspects involved in Sharif’s killing, was ready. He said the draft was expected to be approved at the next cabinet meeting.

At the last hearing on June 13, 2023, the AGP had said that a proper MLA was being drafted and would be presented to the cabinet for final approval.

When asked if a decision from the Kenyan court had been made, the AGP confirmed it had. Three weeks earlier, the Kenyan High Court in Kajiado had ruled that the 2022 killing of Arshad Sharif by Kenyan law enforcement was unlawful. The Supreme Court, however, said it would not discuss the merits of the case at this time.

During the hearing, Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui reminded the court that he had submitted an application on behalf of the journalist’s mother. He said those who claim to know the culprits should be called to court. He also reminded the court of its role as a “facilitator” in the matter.

Siddiqui requested the court to reschedule the hearing within two weeks, but Justice Shah noted that rescheduling depends on the judges’ availability. The hearing was then adjourned indefinitely.