PESHAWAR: The commissioner of Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) on Saturday reserved judgment over whether the political agent of Khyber Agency should conduct retrial of Dr Shakil Afridi or only hear fresh arguments by the counsel in the case of his having links with a Bara-based banned militant outfit.

Following completion of arguments by the counsel for Dr Shakil and the Khyber Agency administration, the Commissioner FCR, Munir Azam, fixed March 15 for pronouncement of the order.

The then commissioner FCR, the ap-pellate forum under the regulation, had on Aug 29, 2013 partially allowed an appeal of Dr Shakil and set aside his conviction and sentence of 33-year imprisonment awarded to him by the assistant political agent (APA) and remanded the case back to the Khyber Agency political agent.

However, the commissioner`s order was vague regarding whether the political agent (PA) would conduct fresh trial or only hear fresh arguments, and had only directed the PA to weigh afresh the arguments of both the parties under the law and rewaj (custom).

A petition was filed against the said order of the commissioner before the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) Tribunal, the third and final judicial forum under the FCR, on behalf of Dr Shakil by his brother Dr Jamil Afridi, seeking clarity in the order of the commissioner. The three-member tribunal on Dec 18 remanded the case back to the commissioner with the direction to pronounce clear orders regarding his tri-al by the PA.

Advocates Samiullah Afridi andQamar Nadeem Afridi appeared for Dr Shakil on Saturday and contended thatin his short order the commissioner had directed the PA to conduct retrial whereas in the detailed judgment the commissioner had mentioned the words fresh arguments, so both the orders were contradictory. They contended that the Constitution guaranteed fair trial and it would be in the interest of justice that the PA should conduct fresh trial instead of only hearing arguments.

They argued that when Dr Shakil was convicted in the first instance by the APA in May 2012, he was not confronted with the evidence available against him nor was he told about the council of elders constituted by the trial court under Section 11 of FCR.

They contended that under the law and local custom the witnesses must testify in the presence of both the parties, but in the present case whole proceedings were conducted in the absence of the appellant. They added that it was the right of every accused to defend himself through counsel and cross-examine the witnesses, but in this case nosuch opportunity was given.

The special prosecutor for tribal administration contended that the council of elders was constituted under the FCR and in its findings were based on evidence. He contended that the order of the commissioner was clear that only fresh arguments should be heard in the instant case and there was no need of fresh trial.

Dr Shakil, a former agency surgeon, was picked up allegedly by an intelligence agency in May 2011 on suspicion of helping the American CIA to trace Osama bin Laden by carrying out a fake vaccination campaign in Abbottabad.

However, he was not convicted on that charge. The APA/additional district magistrate convicte d him on May 23, 2012 on the charges of being involved in antistate activities by supporting the Barabased Lashkar-i-Islam, and sentenced him on different counts to a total of 33 years imprisonment. The said conviction was set aside by the commissioner in Aug 2013.