The High Court in Islamabad questioned the closed-door proceedings of the cipher case during a recent hearing presided over by Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb. Barrister Salman Akram Raja appeared via video link for the plea against the in-camera proceedings.
At the onset of the hearing, Justice Aurangzeb expressed concerns about the way the trial was progressing and raised queries about the closed-door nature of the proceedings. Even minimal attendance, such as a few individuals or family members, would still classify the trial as closed-door, he noted.
The Attorney General informed the court that statements from 25 prosecution witnesses had been recorded, with 12 of them being recorded in the presence of the media after December 21.
Justice Aurangzeb referred to the earlier understanding that a trial conducted within a prison would be open, but now, such trials were being labeled as in-camera. This change prompted scrutiny about the specifics of Section 14 orders related to in-camera proceedings.
The court emphasized the need to comprehend what constitutes an open trial, citing the evolution of human rights and the significance of safeguarding the state while ensuring transparent proceedings. References were made to previous judgments and the insufficiency of evidence, as highlighted by the Supreme Court.
The Attorney General clarified that three witnesses’ statements, related to cipher code, were not meant to be publicized. However, the court pointed out that 12 other witnesses had their statements recorded in the closed-door trial, questioning the understanding of what constitutes an open trial.
