ISLAMABAD: The
Supreme Court will take up on Monday the Sindh government’s request for urgent
hearing of its appeal against the overturning of Ahmed Omer Saeed
Sheikh’s conviction for the killing of Wall Street Journal (WSJ) bureau
chief Daniel Pearl.
The apex court at
the last hearing on June 1 had asked the Sindh government to furnish complete
record comprising all evidence along with its appeal challenging the decision
of the Sindh High Court in the Daniel Pearl case.
Besides the Sindh
government, the parents of the slain journalist, Ruth Pearl and Judea
Pearl, had also moved appeals through senior counsel Faisal Siddiqui.
A three-judge bench
comprising Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Yahya Afridi
will consider the provincial government’s application in which it had requested
the Supreme Court to consider hearing the challenge to the April 2 decision
during or soon after the summer vacation, which usually end in the first week
of October.
Sindh govt told
to furnish complete record with its challenge to overturning of Sheikh’s
conviction
The Sindh government
through Prosecutor General Dr Fiaz Shah in its appeal urged the SC to set aside
the SHC order that modified the sentence of Omer Sheikh to seven years rigorous
imprisonment with a fine of Rs2 million. The government expressed the apprehension
that the accused could abscond along with co-accused after the SHC modified the
sentence of Sheikh and acquitted three co-conspirators namely Fahad Naseem,
Sheikh Adil and Salman Saqib, who were earlier sentenced to life imprisonment
by an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) in Karachi.
Daniel Pearl, 38,
was doing research on religious extremism in Karachi when he was abducted in
January 2002. A graphic video showing his decapitation was delivered to the US
consulate a month later. Subsequently, Sheikh was arrested in 2002 and
sentenced to death by the trial court.
Meanwhile, Ruth and
Judea Pearl through their petitions had pleaded that the SHC erred in
discarding the evidence of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) forensic
expert on the ground that the forensic expert had stated in his evidence that
he was given the laptop, belonging to Fahad Naseem on Feb 4, 2002, whereas the
witnesses had stated in their evidence that the same laptop was recovered on
Feb 11, 2002. The evidence of the forensic expert and his forensic expert
report clearly showed that the said laptop was used for sending the ransom
emails, they pleaded.
Moreover, the
evidence of the forensic expert was clearly corroborated by the evidence of the
independent witnesses, such as prosecution witnesses Sheikh Naeem and Mehmood
Iqbal proving that the internet connection given to Fahad Naseem was used for
sending the ransom emails.
The SHC even
erroneously discarded the evidence of prosecution witness Zaheer Ahmed by
declaring him a chance witness, even though his independent evidence supports
the fact that the laptop was recovered. Therefore, in view of the strong
independent corroboration, the evidence of the forensic expert and his forensic
expert report could not have been discarded solely on the basis of
contradictions in the dates of his examination of the laptop and the same was
liable to be considered as incriminating evidence against Shaikh, pleaded the
parents of the slain journalist.
Newspaper: Dawn
