Bhutto's death
Listen to article
Nearly five decades ago, on 4th April 1979, Pakistan witnessed a grave injustice - the execution of a politically victimised leader. He was none other than Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the democratically elected leader of Pakistan, who gave the country its Constitution, which remains in use to this day.
Recognising his merit on this March 23, 2025, former Prime Minister and founder of Pakistan People's Party (PPP), Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was posthumously awarded the Nishan-i-Pakistan, the nation's highest civilian honour. The award, received by his daughter Sanam Bhutto, recognised his contributions to the country, democracy and the people.
ZAB was executed on April 4, 1979, following a conviction in a highly controversial murder case, widely condemned for lacking due process. His execution was later regarded as a judicial murder in the country's history.
Nearly a year ago, Supreme Court judges reviewed the case and concluded that Bhutto's trial had been unfair, denying him due process at both the trial and appellate levels - an acknowledgment seen as a correction of a historic miscarriage of justice.
The Bhutto family's political legacy in Pakistan is marred by a series of tragic events, each paying a price for their unflinching sincerity and standing tall against oppression and injustice. From ZAB's judicially contested execution to Benazir Bhutto's assassination, Shahnawaz Bhutto's mysterious death in South Africa and Murtaza Bhutto's controversial police encounter, the family has faced unpredictable deaths, all seemingly in service of protecting the rights of the people at the stake of their lives.
ZAB, a visionary leader, faced grave injustice when he was judicially convicted and sentenced to death in 1979. His execution, later remembered as a judicial murder, sent shockwaves through Pakistan. Bhutto's commitment to a democratic and progressive Pakistan was abruptly cut short, and the repercussions of his unjust death were felt across the nation.
Benazir Bhutto, his daughter and political successor, emerged only as a hope for democratic ideals. Her tenure as the first woman to lead a Muslim-majority country faced tumult, culminating in her tragic assassination on December 7, 2007 at Rawalpindi. The consequences were irreparable, impacting not only the Bhutto family but also the stability of Pakistan's political institutions. The death of Benazir Bhutto, the first female prime minister in the Muslim world, left a void in the PPP leadership, prompting questions about the future of democratic governance.
Shahnawaz Bhutto's mysterious sudden death in Nice, France in 1985 is yet another layer to the family's narrative of untimely deaths. The circumstances surrounding his demise remain shrouded in mystery, contributing to the perception that the Bhutto family, committed to the well-being of the people, was beset by unpredictable tragedies.
Murtaza Bhutto, Benazir's brother, met a tragic end during her tenure as PM. His killing in a controversial police encounter in Karachi in 1996 added another layer of complexity to the Bhutto family's political narrative. His outspoken nature and willingness to challenge the status quo led to his untimely death, which remains an unresolved case.
All the casualties within the Bhutto family occurred under circumstances far from natural. They remain the only family in Pakistan's political history to have fallen victim to consequences they did not deserve.
From ZAB's judicial execution to his elder son Shahnawaz's mysterious death by poisoning, from Murtaza's controversial police encounter to Benazir's assassination during a public gathering, each loss inflicted deep wounds that have never fully healed till today.
Rarely does an entire family dedicate itself to service of people, at the stake of personal well-being for the greater good. As Martin Luther King Jr said, "Once you become dedicated to a cause, personal security is not the goal. What will happen to you personally does not matter. My cause, my race, is worth dying for."
Such is the nature of sacrifice for a noble cause.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
14th August Independence Day: A Dawn of Independence
Seventy-nine years ago, a frail yet determined and resolute man led a nation to freedom—freeing us from the double yoke of colonial British domination and Hindu-majority Congress tyranny. The British Raj and Congress conspired to suppress our aspirations, yet the will of the people triumphed. The ballot prevailed over the bullet. A homeland was won —Pakistan—envisioned as a welfare state where the common man, the real architect and author of freedom, would steer the wheels of destiny. But alas, that dream remains unfulfilled. Faiz's stained dawn still lingers--a freedom incomplete, a dream deferred. Despite the passage of nearly eight decades, the life of the common man-- the very soul and architect of Pakistan, remains unchanged—his pain multiplied, his miseries deepened. Betrayed and ignored, he has been reduced to a rhetorical figure—celebrated in speeches during election days, then discarded like torn posters in the corridors of power. Lofty promises evaporate the moment power is secured. Women with malnourished children wander hospitals, only to find absent doctors and missing medicines. Justice is a mirage—expensive, delayed, and often denied--remains out of his reach, especially in lower courts. Police stations designed to protect him, often serve as hubs of power, where only connections and currency speak. In rural Pakistan, children walk miles to access distant, dilapidated schools; public services are practically nonexistent reminding common man of his insignificance. When the skies pour, cities resemble stagnant rivers for days. Water remains accumulated till such time, it gets naturally evaporated. Infrastructure crumbles. The billions borrowed in the people's name for uplifting them vanish into a black hole of inefficiency and corruption making no visible difference. Instead, every rupee borrowed adds weight to the shoulders of the poor—who pay taxes only to endure humiliation, inflation, insecurity, and systemic decay. Those who gave blood for Pakistan now beg for bread in it. Democracy, once promised as the guardian of rights, has been repeatedly derailed by power-hungry generals, exploiting the incompetence of corrupt and opportunist politicians. Parliament—meant to be the voice of the people—has often been silenced. The judiciary, rather than questioning usurpers, has offered them validation—starting from Justice Munir's infamous verdict in the MaulviTamizuddin Khan case of 1955. Since then, dictators have ruled while courts have looked away. Even when democracy returned, it remained controlled, diluted, and elitist. The arrival of Imran Khan was celebrated as a change, a breath of fresh air—a departure from dynastic politics. But that hope, too, proved illusory. He mirrored the very practices he had vowed to end. The man who rallied against begging bowl and slavery shattered past records in borrowing. Political adversaries were hunted and jailed; language unbecoming of leadership became routine. The reformer became just another name in the long ledger of letdown. The change he promised was swallowed by the status quo. The common man—the one who labours, toils, sacrifices—is still shackled by poverty, unemployment, hunger, disease, crime, and injustice. The Constitution guarantees his rights. Parliament claims to represent him. But in truth, he remains marginal—talked about, never acted for. Why, after 79 years, is he still food insecure? Why does poverty, unemployment, and disease haunt every street? Why do a few enjoy palatial homes while millions live in slums, their children pulled out of schools to earn bread? In rural areas, the feudal lords thrive, their opulent havelis towering over peasants shacks. In cities, slums fester beside skyscrapers, a monument to inequality. What did freedom mean if the multitudes remain shackled? This glaring inequality pushes disillusioned youth towards crime, drugs, and extremism. What have we achieved if our people still grope in darkness while nations born after us touch the skies? Nations that rose from ashes--Germany, Japan, South Korea stand as titans. Even Bangladesh once poorer out spaces us in growth. We are still here with birthday problems, and wallow in misgovernance and mediocrity. Our Parliament unites only when it comes to increasing its own perks and privileges. Why not show the same unity and urgency for solving public woes? Why not brainstorming for breaking begging bowl and reviving a moribund economy? Why don't they mourn their failures instead of picking up quarrels in parliament, to take us out of the abyss? Let our legislators burn the midnight oil—not for personal gains but for national salvation. Let them tackle staggering foreign debts, tax evasion, bloated administrative spending, and the burden of unnecessary advisers, SAPMs and parliamentary committees. Let them shrink the cabinet to a functional size, cut elite privileges, and redirect the saved funds to education and health. Let the rich parliamentarians lead by example—living modestly, earning only daily allowances when in session. Let the judiciary be truly independent. Let the Election Commission be powerful and free of political manipulation. Let institutions serve the people, not power. We have a right to ask Parliament to be accountable—to be the house of the people, not the elite. Our struggle for freedom did not end in 1947; it remains unfinished. Real azaadi will come when the people are freed from hunger, fear, debt, and despair and Constitution's promises and fruits of independence reach out to the street, the village, the slum and to the vulnerable. Let us, on this 79th anniversary of our independence, solemnly pledge to fulfilFaiz's dream and vision of a radiant, unblemished dawn worthy of those who gave their all for this land. Let us strive for that 'bright and shining dawn' we once dreamed of—a Pakistan where the common man is no longer betrayed, but finally empowered. Ye daaghdaaghujala, ye shab-gazidasahar Who intezaarthajiska, ye who sahar to nahin… (This stained light, this night-bitten dawn— This is not the dawn we had waited for…) — Faiz Ahmed Faiz Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
14th August Independence Day: Evolution of Pakistani national identity
The establishment of Pakistan as an independent state on August 14, 1947 was an event of historical importance. It created a new national identity of PAKISTANI NATION, which did not physically exist before that date. It was the culmination of a long political struggle of the Muslims of British India to protect and advance their civilizational and cultural identity inspired by the principles and teachings of Islam, their political rights and interest in the context of the state system introduced by the British in India. National Identity is one of the many identities that an individual has. These identities could be linguistic, ethnic, religious, political-ideological, regional or family/tribal. All these identities of human beings are not equally important. Further, their importance can vary over time. One identity, i.e., linguistic, may be a basis of political action at one time but it could lose its political relevance if circumstances and conditions. Out of all these human identities, the national identity is given a priority, although other identities continue to exist. It was the Muslim identity or a sense of Muslim Community in British India which transformed into a Muslim national identity and served as the basis for the demand of a separate homeland of Pakistan. This raises three fundamental questions to understand the establishment of Pakistan as an independent nation-state. First, what constituted distinct Muslim identity in British India? Second, how this sense of community turned into the notion of nationhood and it became a symbol of collective Muslim identity and an instrument of political mobilization. Third, what led the Muslims of British India to conclude that their political future could be secure in a separate HOMELAND of Pakistan? The roots of distinct Muslim identity can be traced back to the advent of Islam in India. Its civilizational and cultural roots can be traced to the teachings, principles and history of Islam. It provided a theoretical and ideological foundation to Muslim identity. Other factors that contributed to this identity were the arrival of Muslims in India in three major waves: the Arab Muslim traders who arrived at western coastline of India and settled there; Muslim invasion led by Muhammad bin Qasim; and arrival of Muslims from Central Asia, Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey in the form of voluntary migrations and armed invasions. The Sufis and Saints came to India from these territories and most Sufi traditions can be traced back to Central Asia and Turkey. There is an overlap in art and architecture, food and dress between Indian Muslims and these regions in the north and northwest. The conversions to Islam, especially because of the teachings of the Sufis and Saints, also strengthened the Muslim community. As the migrants from the Arab world and Central Asia, Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey settled down in India, they became part of Indian society. However, despite living with the followers of other religious and cultural traditions, Muslims whose ancestors migrated to India or embraced Islam, maintained their distinct cultural and civilizational identity which distinguished them from other communities. They developed a sense of confidence as a community because of the long years of Muslim rule in India and their contribution to governance, history, art and architecture and cultural patterns of India. The Muslim civilizational and cultural identity began to acquire political relevance in the post-1857 period when the British government embarked on setting up a new state system. The British introduced a new state system based on codified legal and constitutional arrangements, clearly defined role of different government functionaries, the setting up of civil services recruited gradually through open competitive system, establishment of a professional military and a western education system. They also gradually introduced the electoral process for setting up legislative bodies with limited powers. The changed state system created a competition among different communities living in India, especially between the Muslims and the majority Hindu community, for access to the government jobs, elected legislative bodies, and the governance and political management arrangements. Two major political movements in the post-1857 period increased competition between the two major communities. These were the Hindi-Urdu Controversy (1865 onwards) when the Hindu leadership in Banaras initiated a movement for replacement of Urdu with Hindi written in Devanagari script. This movement impacted other areas, building pressures on Muslims. The other development was the revivalist and reformist Hindu religious and cultural movement in the last decade of the 19th Century, although the roots of these movements went back to the earlier period. These movements were often characterized by anti-Muslim attitudes. These changes, within the framework of the new state governance system, increased the prominence of religious and cultural identities in the political sphere and contributed to its use as an instrument of political mobilization. The Muslim elite realized that they could not benefit from the opportunities created by the new state system because Muslims lacked modern education and they faced a disadvantage in the electoral process because of their smaller population. The major concern of the Muslims of British India at the beginning of the 20th Century was how to protect and advance their socio-cultural and civilizational identity, rights and interests. This goal of the Muslim community in British India remained unchanged, but their strategies changed over time in view of their experience of interacting with other communities and British Indian government. The major political strategies of the Muslims in British India included: Acquisition of modern knowledge, learning of English language and avoidance of participation in active politics. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and his colleagues launched a movement for modern western education based in Aligarh. The new educational institutions combined modern western knowledge with Islamic education. The Aligarh educational movement also helped to connect Muslims living in different parts of India, and it advised them not to join the Congress Party which was set up in 1885. By the beginning of the 20th Century, Muslim elite had emerged that was either educated in the Aligarh based educational institutions or educated in England. They were more conscious of the need to protect the identity, rights and interests of the Muslims in British India. In October 1906, a delegation of 35 Muslim led by Sir Agha Khan lll called on the Viceroy in Simla and asked for separate electorate for Muslims to elect their representatives to the elected councils. The British government conceded this demand of SEPARATE ELECTORATE in 1909. December 30, 1906, the Muslim leaders established a political party – All India Muslim League – to articulate Muslims' rights and interests and take them up with the British government. The Muslim League and Muslim leaders demanded constitutional safeguards and guarantees for the protection of their cultural and civilizational identity, rights and interests. The Lucknow Pact (1916) between the Muslim League and the Congress Party accepted constitutional guarantees for Muslim representation in the elected councils, cabinets and government jobs, weightage to religious minorities for representation in elected council. These guarantees were reiterated in Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah's Fourteen Points in his address to the Muslim leaders in 1929. The Muslim League and the Muslim elite demanded a federal system with autonomy for provinces in British India. They hoped that this would enable them to rule Muslim-majority provinces. When the above-mentioned demands did not materialize because of non-cooperative political disposition of the Congress Party, the Muslim leadership concluded that their political future as a distinct socio-cultural and civilizational identity would not be safe in an independent and untied India. They formally demanded a SEPARATE HOMELAND for them in March 1940, although the discussion on this idea started earlier. The change in the political strategy of the Muslims was the product of their political interaction with the majority Hindu community and the British government in India. Though the Congress Party agreed to constitutional guarantees for the Muslims in the Lucknow Pact (1916) it rejected these guarantees in the Nehru Report (1928) which prepared recommendations for the new constitution. Jinnah attempted to seek amendments in the Nehru Report for accommodation of Muslim political concerns, but his efforts did not succeed. He gave a rejoinder to the Nehru Report and outlined Muslim demands in his famous speech in 1929, described as Jinnah's Fourteen Points. The political divergence between the two communities increased in the course of the Roundtable Conferences in London in 1930-32. Though Jinnah and other Muslim League leadership were disappointed by the disposition of the Congress Party, they still hoped that a federal system with constitutional guarantees for the protection and advancement of Muslim identity, rights and interests could be achieved. What alienated the Muslim League leadership from constitutional guarantees and a federal system was their experience under the Congress Provincial Ministries in six provinces (1937-39). The provincial elections under the Government of India Act, 1935 were held in early 1937. The Congress Party formed government alone or in coalition in six provinces out of eleven. These provinces included Bombay, Madras, Central Province, United Province, Bihar and Orissa. Further, in the then NWFP, the Congress supported the KhudaiKhidmatgar government. Muslims had a bitter political experience in the Congress Party ruled six provinces. There were numerous complaints of discrimination against Muslims in recruitment to government jobs and Hindu cultural traditions were enforced in these provinces under the rubric of Indian culture. The school education was inundated with Hindu traditions, imagery and culture in complete disregard to the sensitivities of Muslims and other religious minorities. The Muslim League published three reports that outlined the mistreatment of Muslims and imposition of Hindu historical and cultural norms on them in the Congress-ruled provinces. All this alienated the Muslim elite altogether who believed that the Congress provincial government policies were a sample of how they would be treated under the Congress rule after the exit of the British rulers. When the Congress ministries resigned in October-November 1939, the Muslim League welcomed the development. On December 22, 1939, Muslims observed the 'Day of Deliverance' to celebrate the exit of the Congress party's provincial ministers. It was in 1938 that the Sindh Muslim League convention in Karachi, chaired by Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah, asked the All-India Muslim League to explore a new political option instead of a federal system for India. The speakers in the convention talked of the need of having a separate homeland. The Muslim political elite's political learning from their political interaction with the Congress led them to change their political strategy from federalism to a separate homeland. They learnt from their political experience that they would be overwhelmed politically and culturally by living under the Congress Party rule in an independent India. The Muslim League demand for a separate homeland was based on the argument that the Muslims of British India were a nation with their distinct cultural and civilizational identity shaped by the teachings and principles of Islam, and rights and interests. As a separate nation they needed a separate homeland in the regions where the Muslims constituted a numerical majority. Three sets of major developments shaped the Muslim struggle in the 1940s. First, the demand for a separate homeland was made in the annual session of the Muslim League, held at Lahore on March 22, 23 and 24, 1940. Second, the notion of a separate homeland was precisely defined in the next six years (1940-46) and the ambiguities in the March 1940 Pakistan Resolution were clarified. Third, the idea of a separate homeland was initiated by the Muslim League elite. They took this message to the common Muslims in the subsequent years and mobilized them in favor of a separate homeland of Pakistan. The results of the 1946 provincial elections showed that the demand for the establishment of Pakistan had become a popular Muslim demand which enjoyed the support of the Muslim populace. It was the determination of the Muslim League leaders under the leadership of Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah and the widespread support of the Muslim populace in British India that turned the demand for the establishment of Pakistan into a reality. It was on August 14, 1947, that the transfer of power ceremony for Pakistan was held at Karachi. Lord Louis Mountbatten, the last British Viceroy, represented the British government at the ceremony. However, Pakistan began to function as an independent nation-state on August 15, 1947, with the oath of Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah as the first Governor-General of Pakistan at 9AM in Karachi. This was followed by the oath of Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan and his cabinet, which was administered by Governor General Jinnah. To conclude, we can argue that the cultural and civilizational identity of the Muslims in British India acquired salience over their other identities and its political relevance increased to such an extent that its status got elevated to the level of the national identity of Pakistan. The notion of a separate homeland of Pakistan was initially articulated by the Muslim League leadership but it became a political reality when the Muslim populace embraced it and demonstrated their support through the democratic process of the 1946 provincial elections. The author is a Political Analyst who holds the PhD Degree from the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA. His latest book entitled 'Pakistan: Political and Constitutional Engineering' published in 2024. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
3 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Justice system's credibility rests in fairness of decisions and timeliness: SC
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court declared that a justice system's credibility rests not only in the fairness of its decisions but also in the timeliness with which those decisions are rendered. A two-judge bench comprising Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Ayesha A Malik stated the courts must evolve into engines of timely, transparent, and citizen-focused justice. This relates to auction of an immovable property carried out by a bank in execution of a money decree dated 26.04.2010. The auction took place in 2011. The petitioner promptly raised objections the same year, which were dismissed. He then filed an appeal before the Peshawar High Court (PHC), which remained pending for 10 years, and ultimately decision was delivered in 2021. The case then reached the Supreme Court in 2022 and was taken up in 2025. The glaring aspect of the case is that after 14 years since the auction and due notice, neither the petitioner nor any authorised representative appeared before the apex court to pursue the petition. The bench, however, dismissed the petition on merits as well as for non-prosecution, and directed the SC office to dispatch a copy of this order to the parties for information and record. The judgment noted that in this case the appeal of the petitioner kept pending before the High Court for 10 years. 'It is beyond cavil that delay in adjudicating cases by the courts at any tier of the justice system corrodes public confidence in the judiciary, undermines the rule of law, and disproportionately harms the weak and vulnerable who cannot afford the cost of prolonged litigation. Delay in adjudication carries severe macroeconomic and societal consequences: it deters investment, renders contracts illusory, and weakens the institutional legitimacy of the judiciary.' The judgment said that the issue of delay is not merely administrative, it is constitutional. The right to access to justice is guaranteed by Articles 4, 9 and 10A of 1973 Constitution. It encompasses within it the right to a fair and timely trial. Delay that renders a remedy ineffective; or a right illusory amount to a denial of due process. Justice, to be real, must be both just and timely. The judgment highlighted that over 2.2 million cases are currently pending before courts across Pakistan, including approximately 55,941 cases before this Court alone, in spite of enhancing the number of judges at the Court. These figures are not abstract; they represent disputes suspended in time. Delay in adjudication is not merely a by-product of docket congestion or branch-level inefficiencies; it is a deeper, structural challenge of judicial governance. The court, as a matter of institutional policy and constitutional responsibility, must urgently transition toward a modern, responsive, and intelligent case management framework. Such a system must, at a minimum, ensure: the early fixation of cases on a non-discriminatory basis; the elimination of 'queue-jumping' and preferential scheduling; the prioritisation of matters involving constitutional, economic, or national importance without compromising the timely resolution of individual claims; the implementation of age-tracking protocols to automatically identify dormant cases; and the judicious use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to assist in scheduling and triage while preserving the sanctity of judicial discretion. Judicial systems across the world have recognised that delay is not an intractable inevitability but a solvable institutional challenge. Countries such as Singapore, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Estonia, Canada, China, Denmark, and Australia have undertaken comprehensive reforms combining technology, structural innovation, and procedural discipline to reduce backlog and enhance judicial efficiency. Through tools such as e-filing, real-time dashboards, automated scheduling, and transparent digital oversight, these jurisdictions have moved from being passive custodians of dockets to active managers of justice delivery. The judgment said these international experiences underscore a basic truth: delays in justice are not inevitable; they are a product of institutional design, and can be remedied with vision, planning, and resolve. The judiciary of Pakistan must draw upon these global lessons and commit to transformative reform that integrates technological innovation, administrative restructuring, and disciplined case management. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
