ISI “biggest violators” of law

[lem34]

Why should I have any grudges against the ISI - grudge implies a personal reason, I'm deploring their actions for national reasons - surely it can't be in the interest of this nation where the ISI is now kidnapping people - beating them to the pulp (many of the people presented in court could hardly walk).

With all due respect, we as Pakistani citizens are duty bound to uphold, protect and abide by the law of Pakistan. If you're saying today that law goes out the window, then sir without the law they are not terrorists, the Iftikhar Chowdhary is not a judge, ISI is not a security agency and you're not a Pakistani.

You must remain true to a standard Pakistan, not an arbitrary Pakistan.

You can not have a judiciary in the true sense of the word without checks and balances. Unfortunately we are not at that juncture at the moment. I posted earlier that even in mature democracies where there are checks and balances and the agencies are mature Judiciary does not get involved in matters of national security.

 

[Awesome]

You can not have a judiciary in the true sense of the word without checks and balances. Unfortunately we are not at that juncture at the moment. I posted earlier that even in mature democracies where there are checks and balances and the agencies are mature Judiciary does not get involved in matters of national security.

National Security is a convenient ruse. More and more these days we are witnessing dissent being treated as disloyalty. Courts can get involved at any juncture - whenever they are invoked. They are the check and balance. The military has been given free hand within its own institution but when it steps outside and wants to arrest citizens of this country, it better have a damn good reason to do so.

The military exists because we the people of Pakistan allow it to exist, the military does not dictate the people's existence.

 

[lem34]

National Security is a convenient ruse. More and more these days we are witnessing dissent being treated as disloyalty. Courts can get involved at any juncture - whenever they are invoked. They are the check and balance. The military has been given free hand within its own institution but when it steps outside and wants to arrest citizens of this country, it better have a damn good reason to do so.

The military exists because we the people of Pakistan allow it to exist, the military does not dictate the people's existence.

National security trumps judiciary in even the most egalitarian and developed democracies. There is no doubt that unchecked we could have an unacceptable situation like that of Chile or Argentina in the past but that is not the case in Pakistan. We have political parties and at least a veneer of democracy.

We can not afford in Pakistan to clip the wings of ISI in the manner being suggested. Our enemies do not play to rules and ISI must be given certain breadth and width and the judiciary must allow certain flexibility when it comes to matters of National Security.

 

[niaz]

I don’t like many actions of the ISI. Any organization which has had chiefs in the likes of the bigot Hamid Gul cannot be all clean and surely guilty of many crimes. However, in case of terrorists being freed by the courts, I would go along with ISI. It appears that Courts are there only to support the rights of the Criminal.

Common sense dictates that normal laws don’t apply to the terrorist such as Suicide Bomber. Chances are that the young man has not committed any crime beforehand and you cannot officially charge a person for ‘Thinking’ about committing a crime. Once it is done it is too late because the person is dead and has killed score of innocents with him.

How would one fight such crimes and attempt to stop them? It can only be thru circumstantial evidence such as being friendly to known terrorists or being active member of known terrorist organizations. True that there will be some ‘Human rights’ violation of the suspected criminals but ‘Human rights’ of dozens of possible innocent victims will be safe guarded.

This is a very special war which we are losing in Pakistan. I agree with Hon Bilal Haider that it appears that there are far more terrorists sympathizers among the Judges than in the ISI.
We have to ask ourselves the question:

Do we go on releasing suspected terrorists or keep them incarcerated; even though some of them may be innocent?

Locking up suspected terrorists assuming only half of them were guilty should surely save lives of hundreds on innocent victims of the suicide bombers. In my opinion we will never get rid of the menace of terrorism applying the Anglo Saxon “Innocent until proven guilty” or ‘Presumption of innocence’ principle where onus of proof beyond reasonable doubt rests with the Prosecution. Instead for suspected terrorists, onus of the proof of “Innocence” should with be shifted to the Defence.

This would mean a Change in Constitution, so be it, should we go on letting the terrorists shedding innocent Pakistani blood in the name of Islam just because our police is inept and defence lawyers too slick?

 

[lem34]

In my opinion we will never get rid of the menace of terrorism applying the Anglo Saxon “Innocent until proven guilty” or ‘Presumption of innocence’ principle where onus of proof beyond reasonable doubt rests with the Prosecution. Instead for suspected terrorists, onus of the proof of “Innocence” should with be shifted to the Defence.

But I don't understand why forum members do not recognise that even the Anglo-Saxon principles have already been compromised. Why therefore should we hold our ISI to a higher standard than say the UK its agencies??

In post 44 I said

British judiciary reacted to the GCHQ case. Where Lords Fraser, Scarman and Diplock all believed that the issue of national security was outside the remit of the courts, Scarman writing that "It is par excellence a non-justiciable question. The judicial process is totally inept [sic] to deal with the sort of problems which it [national security] involves"

 

[Jango]

People should get the fact that not everybody missing is captured by the ISI, and those who are captured by the ISI are not always innocent.

Some go away to fight this so called Jihad, some simply are killed by BLA and the lot, while those who are captured by the ISI do have some connection to the terrorists , while some don't. [B]And in this whole episode, the terrorists currently in custody might also use this ploy and get freed and sympathized with.[/B]

It is'nt like the ISI station chief or somebody decides, hey let's go and kidnap and torture some civvies for fun. After all that station commander is answerable to someone.

In the army even if a bullet is fired outside war, a report is written on it, and the circumstances are found out. So, everybody is answerable to somebody in the army, except the COAS maybe.

 

[Awesome]

National security trumps judiciary in even the most egalitarian and developed democracies. There is no doubt that unchecked we could have an unacceptable situation like that of Chile or Argentina in the past but that is not the case in Pakistan. We have political parties and at least a veneer of democracy.

Why do you want national security for a nation which can't be free?

Nothing trumps nationhood and a nation requires its freedoms, we are not part of this nations to be slaves to the ISI or to be dictated how to live, how to vote and which jail cell to rot in.

Nothing trumps justice because without justice, ISI will throw you in jail over its whims (as it did), it WILL manipulate the votes (as it did as now evidenced in the reopening of Mehrangate)...

You have to stop giving this excuse that the US does it so why can't the ISI - first of all, your condition is worse than that of dogs if you compare the situation in which the CIA keeps its citizens and in which the ISI keeps you - second CIA just keeps its citizens like a dog, so you're arguing with me through this comparison to be either a dog or worse than it.

We can not afford in Pakistan to clip the wings of ISI in the manner being suggested. Our enemies do not play to rules and ISI must be given certain breadth and width and the judiciary must allow certain flexibility when it comes to matters of National Security.

Doctrine of necessity is over, dead, buried. I'm not saying we clip the wings of the ISI, let it conduct its operations out of Pakistan, let it fish out spies within Pakistan but when it goes overboard - hang them. Don't like it? Quit. That's the mettle, intelligence agencies are made of.

Nazaria-e-Zaroorat ne sirf gandh pehlaya hai iss mulk main.

This same ISI is now caught hiding its face after the scandal of it paying millions to Nawaz and Shahbaz has come to light. Imagine if they hadn't done that, today there would be no Nawaz Sharif!

As far as our enemies are concerned, even Ajmal Kasab is getting a trial. He has not been beaten to the pulp and he's an enemy of theirs, not a citizen - what is your excuse for wanting this zillat upon yourselves.

Go through a trial - collect evidence and try them. Show some competence.

 

[Awesome]

Common sense dictates that normal laws don’t apply to the terrorist such as Suicide Bomber.

It becomes highly uncommon once you factor in that - who declared a "book stall wala" a terrorist. Kisi bhi fard-e-wahid ki baat pe main yakeen kyun karloon?

I mean, you're admitting, that ISI will have no proof, ISI won't be able to prove that this person is a terrorist in a court of law because they suck at Crime Scene evidence collection and yet after such incompetence you want this nation to agree to let them decide who is a terrorist or not?

I want the courts to decide just like they decide the guilt of EVERYTHING else, EVERYWHERE else. Even the Chief Executive of this country was answerable to the court, ISI kis khait ki mooli hai.

Mirza Aslam beg had to give a written apology. The Judiciary is pressing upon them for bribing politicians, more such cases would open up. This is not going to stop, the judiciary will keep breathing down their necks, until one day they snap and start killing us for questioning them. They will get away with this as long as they know they have enough people to back up their eschewed sense of justice, this gunda raj, within Pakistan.

 

[lem34]

I mean, you're admitting, that ISI will have no proof, ISI won't be able to prove that this person is a terrorist in a court of law because they suck at Crime Scene evidence collection and yet after such incompetence you want this nation to agree to let them decide who is a terrorist or not?

I want the courts to decide just like they decide the guilt of EVERYTHING else, EVERYWHERE else. Even the Chief Executive of this country was answerable to the court, ISI kis khait ki mooli hai.

Mirza Aslam beg had to give a written apology. The Judiciary is pressing upon them for bribing politicians, more such cases would open up. This is not going to stop, the judiciary will keep breathing down their necks, until one day they snap and start killing us for questioning them. They will get away with this as long as they know they have enough people to back up their eschewed sense of justice, this gunda raj, within Pakistan.

I have averred to our judiciary being somewhat immature when compared to mature democracies. What you are asserting is fine in utopia. we are far from that utopia, even democracies that have existed for hundreds of years and agree with the concept of separation of powers accept that in matters of national security Judiciary has no part to play.

Please Asimbhai do give me an example of a country in the world where judiciary trumps national security because I don't think what you want exists other than in a perfect democracy. In a perfect democracy you are correct judiciary should trump national security

 

[Awesome]

You see Judiciary is not be all end all.

To begin at the beginning: Nation's ultimate authority are the political sovereign. The political sovereign are distinguished through a majority vote, the vote determines the government.

With the government comes the three branches, executive, legislative and judicial.

The Judicial branch explains laws and applies verdicts based upon them through the trial system.

Thereby making them the RIGHT authority to judge all cases pertaining to crimes committed within Pakistan whether or not national security concerns are involved or not.

Recap - The political sovereign - we the people - have set up this system. ISI or any other agency has to work with this system, because thats our order to them. We - our majority vote in a manner of speaking is the word of God for the ISI, we say try the ISI, they get tried and currently this is the set up we have made. I'm stressing upon this point since what WE say goes - not what the ISI. We have said and put it down on paper - the constitution that ISI does not have the right to kill anyone in Pakistan as they see fit. Everyone in Pakistan has a right to a fair trial - WE have said so. The word of God has been laid down in front of them (not to be taken as an offense, just illustrating an example).

To say any different is to say that ISI has the right to kill anyone they like in Pakistan. How can we give them the authority to kill any Pakistani at will? Do we enjoy getting killed for no reason at all? Do we enjoy getting called terrorists without any recourse left at our disposal? I suspect not. So we go to the courts and hope the courts bring us justice and hope that the courts keep the ISI in line as well.

Can we have national security by screwing over the nation? Who will secure the nation from the ISI? Who will determine if the ISI is lying about national security or not? And who will bring the justice if the nation's security risk is the ISI? The nation is supreme not the ISI.

 

[Waffen SS]

The ISI is such an incompetent institution that it defies common sense.

If they had to nab some terrorists, they should never have announced that they are in custody. Just abduct them clandestinely and put them in an unknown place; torture and kill them and then dipose their bodies such that they can never be found.

I ask whether retards are being hired by the ISI. Agencies around the world commit all THE DIRTY STUFF but they atleast have the brains to hide their identities and leave no proof of their work.

These geniuses actually ADMITTED IN COURT that some people were being held. WTF; are you policemen or spies?

In some cases, they even communicated to the relatives of the missing persons that their loved ones were abducted by them. Well their brains are certainly not working.

Have they ever heard RAW, MOSSAD, KGB etc ever admitting their activities in front of the media and judges?????????? NO

 

[pak-marine]

How is ISI the biggest violator looser & in fcckn competent .. take Look around the security situation of Pakistan one can refer to present , past and unfortunately the future does not seem rosy either with these people in control

 

[Omar1984]

Notice only Mohajirs and pro-indian people abusing ISI. (Waffen and pak-marine).

Patriotic Pakistanis love ISI

 

[lem34]

Notice only Mohajirs and pro-indian people abusing ISI. (Waffen and pak-marine).

Patriotic Pakistanis love ISI

Yaar that is not fair. In a perfect world Asim is 100% correct. We should not be critical of some idealism. Maybe you and I are cynical and that's why we are prepared to accept means to an ends and some are not. But it is wrong for you to to make this a partisan thing. I know punjabis former Pakistani army officers who also hold differing views to us.

In fact it is very unhelpful for you to suggest that someones views are because they belong to a particular community.btw Mushy is Mohajir and he is always supportive of ISI lol

 

[Tiger Awan]

All of us know how bad the situation is as far as the lower courts are concerned. My cousin was shot twice. 4-5 hours before he died he told my father ( in front of a policeman) who shot him and after 4 years of time and money wastage one of the culprit is free

How can we put all the blame on ISI????