Landmark ruling admits flaws in Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s 1979 death sentence

In a historic verdict, Pakistan’s Supreme Court has officially declared that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, did not receive a fair trial before his execution in 1979. This judgment, delivered decades after Bhutto’s controversial death, addresses longstanding criticisms of the judicial process that led to his hanging. The ruling emanates from a reference filed by Bhutto’s son-in-law and former President, Asif Ali Zardari, in 2011, seeking to clarify the fairness of the trial that resulted in Bhutto’s demise.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the founder of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), faced the gallows in April 1979, following a conviction for masterminding the murder of a political opponent. His execution marked a critical and contentious point in Pakistan’s political history, occurring two years after his ouster by then-military ruler General Muhammad Zia-ul Haq. Legal experts across the nation have long debated the legitimacy of Bhutto’s trial, with many labelling his execution a ‘judicial murder’ instigated by the military regime.

Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, in delivering the court’s unanimous opinion, highlighted the shortcomings in adhering to the principles of a fair trial and due process during Bhutto’s prosecution. This acknowledgement by the apex court opens a new chapter in Pakistan’s legal history, signifying a willingness to confront past injustices and the influence of external pressures on judicial proceedings.

The presence of Bhutto Zardari, Bhutto’s grandson, in the courtroom, underscored the generational impact of the ruling, which he termed a long-awaited vindication. The decision has sparked a nationwide discourse on the integrity of Pakistan’s judicial system and the need for reforms to ensure justice and due process for all citizens, irrespective of their status.

Political figures and human rights advocates have welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision as a monumental step towards rectifying historical wrongs and restoring public confidence in the judiciary. The verdict not only revisits a pivotal moment in Pakistan’s past but also sets a precedent for the legal acknowledgement of miscarriages of justice, potentially paving the way for more equitable judicial processes in the future.