• Tuesday, November 19, 2019

Asghar Khan case verdict

Discussion in 'Pakistani Siasat' started by Leader, Oct 19, 2012.

  1. Leader

    Leader ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    29,159
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Ratings:
    +27 / 39,538 / -18
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    FIA directed to frame charges against General Aslam Baig & DG ISI Durrani for bribing the elections, SC further said that 90s elections were rigged by these two individuals to get certain candidates/party win elections


    :tup::tup::tup::tup:


    SC says former Army chief, DG ISI, president involved in rigging 1990 elections


    First time in Pakistan that these military goons are convicted... step forward !!:pakistan:
     
  2. Leader

    Leader ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    29,159
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Ratings:
    +27 / 39,538 / -18
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    SHORT O R D E R

    IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, CJ.– The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan commands that it is the will of the people of Pakistan to establish an order wherein the State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people, wherein the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, etc., shall be fully observed, so that the people of Pakistan may prosper and attain their rightful and honoured place amongst the nations of the world, and make their full contribution towards international peace and progress and happiness of humanity. People ofPakistan had been struggling to establish a parliamentary and democratic order since long within the framework of the Constitution and now they foresee a strong system which is established by the passage of time without any threat and which is subject to the constitution and rule of law.

    2. The essence of this Human Rights case is based on the fundamental right of citizens enshrined in Article 17 of the Constitution. It raises an important question of public importance to enforce the fundamental rights, inter alia, noted herein above, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Article 184(3) of the Constitution, jurisdiction has been assumed and exercised to declare, for the reasons to be recorded later, as under:-

    (1) That citizens of Pakistan as a matter of right are free to elect their representatives in an election process being conducted honestly, justly, fairly and in accordance with law.

    (2) The general election held in the year 1990 was subjected to corruption and corrupt practices as in view of the overwhelming material produced by the parties during hearing it has been established that an “Election Cell” had been created in the Presidency, which was functioning to provide financial assistance to the favoured candidates, or a group of political parties to achieve desired result by polluting election process and to deprive the people of Pakistan from being represented by their chosen representatives.

    (3) A President of Pakistan, in Parliamentary system of government, being head of the State represents the unity of the Republic under Article 41 of the Constitution. And as per the oath of his office in all circumstances, he will do right to all manner of people, according to law, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. Thus, holder of office of President of Pakistan, violates the Constitution, if he fails to treat all manner of people equally and without favouring any set, according to law, and as such, creates/provides an occasion which may lead to an action against him under the Constitution and the Law.

    (4) The President of Pakistan, Chief of Army Staff, DG ISI or their subordinates certainly are not supposed to create an Election Cell or to support a political party/ group of political parties, because if they do so, the citizens would fail to elect their representatives in an honest, fair and free process of election, and their actions would negate the constitutional mandate on the subject.

    (5) However, in the instant case it has been established that in the general elections of 1990 an Election Cell was established in the Presidency to influence the elections and was aided by General (R) Mirza Aslam Baig who was the Chief of Army Staff and by General (R) Asad Durrani, the then Director General ISI and they participated in the unlawful activities of the Election Cell in violation of the responsibilities of the Army and ISI as institutions which is an act of individuals but not of institutions represented by them respectively, noted herein above.

    (6) ISI or MI may perform their duties as per the laws to safeguard the borders of Pakistan or to provide civil aid to the Federal Government, but such organizations have no role to play in the political activities/politics, for formulation or destabilization of political Governments, nor can they facilitate or show favour to a political party or group of political parties or politicians individually, in any manner, which may lead in his or their success.

    (7) It has also been established that late Ghulam Ishaq Khan, the then President of Pakistan with the support of General (R) Aslam Baig, General (R) Asad Durrani and others, who were serving in M.I and now either have passed away or have retired, were supporting the functioning of the ‘Election Cell’, established illegally.

    (8) Mr. M. Younas A. Habib, the then Chief Executive of Habib Bank Ltd. at the direction and behest of above noted functionaries, arranged/provided Rs.140 million belonging to public exchequer, out of which an amount of Rs.60 million was distributed to politicians, whose incomplete details have been furnished by General (R) Asad Durrani, however, without a thorough probe no adverse order can be passed against them in these proceedings.

    (9) The Armed Forces of Pakistan, under the directions of Federal Government, defend Pakistan against external aggression or threat of war and, subject to law, are to act in aid of civil power when called upon to do so under Article 245 of the Constitution, thus, any extra-constitutional act, calls for action in accordance with the Constitution of Pakistan and the law against the officers/officials of Armed Forces without any discrimination.

    (10) The Armed Forces have always sacrificed their lives for the country to defend any external or internal aggression for which it being an institution is deeply respected by the nation.

    (11) The Armed Forces, in discharge of their functions, seek intelligence and support from ISI, MI, etc., and on account of security threats to the country on its frontiers or to control internal situations in aid of civil power when called upon to do so. However, ISI, MI or any other Agency like IB have no role to play in the political affairs of the country such as formation or destabilization of government, or interfere in the holding of honest, free and fair elections by Election Commission of Pakistan. Involvement of the officers/members of secret agencies i.e.ISI,MI, IB, etc. in unlawful activities, individually or collectively calls for strict action being, violative of oath of their offices, and if involved, they are liable to be dealt with under the Constitution and the Law.


    (12) Any Election Cell/Political Cell in Presidency or ISI or MI or within their formations shall be abolished immediately and any letter/notification to the extent of creating any such Cell/Department (by any name whatsoever, explained herein, shall stand cancelled forthwith.

    (13) Late Ghulam Ishaq Khan, the then President of Pakistan, General (R) Aslam Baig and General (R) Asad Durrani acted in violation of the Constitution by facilitating a group of politicians and political parties, etc., to ensure their success against the rival candidates in the general election of 1990, for which they secured funds from Mr. Younas Habib. Their acts have brought a bad name toPakistanand its Armed Forces as well as secret agencies in the eyes of the nation, therefore, notwithstanding that they may have retired from service, the Federal Government shall take necessary steps under the Constitution and Law against them.

    (14) Similarly, legal proceedings shall be initiated against the politicians, who allegedly have received donations to spend on election campaigns in the general election of 1990, therefore, transparent investigation on the criminal side shall be initiated by the FIA against all of them and if sufficient evidence is collected, they shall be sent up to face the trial, according to law.
    Mr. Younas Habib shall also be dealt with in the same manner.

    (15) Proceedings shall also be launched against the persons specified hereinabove for affecting the recovery of sums received by them with profit thereon by initiating civil proceedings, according to law.

    (16) An amount of Rs.80 million, statedly, has been deposited in Account No. 313 titled Survey and Construction Group Karachi, maintained by MI, therefore, this amount with profit shall be transferred to Habib Bank Ltd. if the liability of HBL has not been adjusted so far, otherwise, the same may be deposited in the treasury account of Government of Pakistan.
    Chief Justice
    Judge
    Judge
    Islamabad, the
    19th October, 2012
    Nisar/*
    Approved For Reporting
     
  3. Sinnerman108

    Sinnerman108 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    7,374
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Ratings:
    +4 / 7,405 / -12
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    The question in my mind is, how will Nawaz Sharif explain his Anti Army stand now ?
    whereas it has been proven that "BHOLA" was brought in, fed and taught under the military's tuition program.

    "BHOLA" indeed is a very unthankful character.
     
  4. Leader

    Leader ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    29,159
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Ratings:
    +27 / 39,538 / -18
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    thankful to whom; the military goons who had no right to bribe interfere or even have a say in the matters in which they are today declared guilty?
     
  5. Pakistanisage

    Pakistanisage PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    9,448
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Ratings:
    +19 / 15,744 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan


    So the Military are GOONS in your feeble mind, so what do you have to say about the lowlife Pakistani Politicians whose favourite activity is stealing and robbing from Pakistan and its people.
     
  6. Leader

    Leader ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    29,159
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Ratings:
    +27 / 39,538 / -18
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Bitchh Please, rotten eggs of the same basket !!!!! :partay:
     
  7. Dil Pakistan

    Dil Pakistan SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,233
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,735 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Same thing! they are also GOONS
     
  8. Husnainshah

    Husnainshah FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    696
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2011
    Ratings:
    +0 / 668 / -1
    Morally I'd say they're much superior to those who break the nation in half, are unaccountable, deprive people of their right to vote for Decades, conspire against foreign countries, provide safe havens for terrorists and what not?
    Yet you dare talk about ''corruption''?
     
  9. Luftwaffe

    Luftwaffe PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    9,561
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Ratings:
    +8 / 8,405 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Canada
    Now nawaz sharif his lot, jumat islami and lot and lotas from certain other Parties have nothing to coverup, They need to be over thrown and disqualified permanently after corruption has been proven.

    Here is an important point that people are perceiving it wrongly, CJ said Army Chief and ISI heads were individually involved blame is not upon Institution, so there is no point in bashing Army.
     
  10. Leader

    Leader ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    29,159
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Ratings:
    +27 / 39,538 / -18
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Asghar Khan’s vigil


    A FEW minutes before the Supreme Court reassembled to announce its short order in Asghar Khan’s case, Gen Durrani (retd), sitting next to me in the courtroom, muttered audibly, “I didn’t think I would end this way”. He looked ordinary and frail. Was he ever anything more? I wondered.



    Gen Durrani then rose from his seat to leave. “I can’t stay any longer, come by one of these days, we’ll talk,” he said to me, the person who had spent months demanding that he and Gen Beg (retd) be prosecuted for subversion of the constitution: they had conspired to usurp the will of the people by stealing the election of 1990.

    Throughout these months Gen Durrani had repeatedly said to me during breaks: “We considered our actions sacred. Whatever I did, I did out of conviction not merely because I was ordered by the army chief to do so. Now I will hide nothing.”

    A few days earlier, Brig Hamid Saeed (retd), the then MI head in Sindh, who had admitted to personally handing over money to various politicians on instructions received from Gen Durrani, had filed a statement in court in which he had described his reasons for considering Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto a security threat. He remained unrepentant.

    In my concluding rebuttal, before Bench One retired to compose its short order, I had asked the court to hand down a judgment that would not allow a future commander of the 111 Brigade, or any other adventurer, to hide behind the defence of having been commanded by a superior to subvert the constitution: “Any commander who surrounds the prime minister’s house or that of the chief justice should be left in no doubt that no notion of the ‘larger national interest’ will ultimately protect him from disgrace and prosecution.”

    Air Marshal Asghar Khan (retd) and I had agreed that this was a case primarily about the army officers who had acted with scant regard for their role prescribed by the constitution. The prosecution and conviction of a bunch of politicians could be pursued once the liability of the generals had been determined.

    When Bench One reassembled at 1.30pm on Friday, Oct 19, the courtroom was almost empty. Neither Gen Beg nor his counsel had turned up. The attorney general had earlier in the day spent much time arguing against the imposition of any restriction on the president’s political role. In my view this was unwise as it had forced the court into opining about the correctness or otherwise of the attorney general’s argument.

    I had earlier argued that the case did not directly raise the issue of the president’s formal political role or authority as the supreme commander of the armed forces since president Ghulam Ishaq Khan could not be said to have exercised any formal authority in allegedly seeking to subvert the general election of 1990.

    There was indeed no institutional record of him having issued any orders as the president. A verbal instigation to violate the constitution did not implicate the question of the presidency’s formal political or military role. A clear crime and exercise of authority in the bona fide, but mistaken, belief that the action being taken was within the president’s constitutional power were two entirely different matters.

    The attorney general had not returned to hear the order. Air Marshal Asghar Khan, his equally resolute wife and the late Omar Asghar’s son, Mustafa, sat to my left. A small number of journalists sat in the two extremities of the courtroom. One could not help noticing the sharp contrast to the jam-packed courtroom that had awaited the short order in the NRO case, the other ‘historic’ case in which I was involved as the petitioner Dr Mubashir’s counsel.

    The issues in Asghar Khan’s case were of far greater structural importance. The NRO case was about parity between different classes of civilians and the recovery from politicians of the proceeds of alleged corruption.

    Despite the court’s clear declaration that it did not propose to say anything about the armed forces or the ISI as institutions it was clear that the judgment in Asghar Khan’s case would have profound implications, formal as well as informal, for the civil-military imbalance that has plagued the state throughout its history.

    When the court had asked me, some months ago, if I wanted notices issued to the accused politicians I had answered in the negative. This was a well-considered decision made with the air marshal’s concurrence.

    The case had already stagnated for 16 years. Involving the politicians would result in delaying the more important judgment regarding the role of the army officers that could be given on the basis of the material already on the file of the court.

    However, once it was clear to the media and the political classes that these proceedings would not result in any politician being immediately convicted their interest seemed to wane. Hence the empty courtroom.

    Gen Beg and Gen Durrani took stands before the Supreme Court that were divergent in significant aspects. Gen Beg’s position was that the operation to stop the PPP was a matter between the president and the director general ISI, Gen Durrani. His role was one of an onlooker who merely ordered probity in the distribution of funds through the maintenance of meticulous accounts.

    Nevertheless, almost Rs80m taken from a nationalised bank remain unaccounted for. I had argued that even if Gen Beg’s version is accepted, it was his responsibility to prevent the participation of his subordinates in the subversion of the constitution. His personal liability arose from the doctrine of ‘command responsibility’. His failure to take action made him culpable.

    Gen Durrani, on the other hand, described Gen Beg as the man who actively directed the ‘disgraceful business’. In a statement before the Supreme Court, Gen Durrani stated that while the ISI is formally under the prime minister his real ‘boss’ as the DG was the army chief.

    The Supreme Court’s order of Oct 19 has held both of them liable to be acted against under the constitution and the law. None of the defences taken — the operation was commanded by a superior, the army chief was not actively involved and hence could not be held liable or that the action was justified by national interest — has carried any weight.

    The writer represented Air Marshal Asghar Khan (retd) in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.


    Such a mentality they have, read the starting comment of Durrani, in urdu it would be "mein nay kabhi nahi socha tha mere anjaam asa hoga"

    link

    http://dawn.com/2012/10/31/asghar-khans-vigil/