Haqqani says facilitated presence of CIA operatives in Pakistan on order of civilian leaders

[Hussain Farooqui]

2008-2013 was the worst era in all of Pakistans history.

The ones who ruled over that period of time have a particular slogan ,"Kall bhi Bhutto Zinda that, aaj bhi Bhutto zinda hai, kitnay Bhutto maro gaay, har ghar saay Bhutto niklary gaa. ".

 

[VCheng]

Even FGCM applies, there are provisions in law through which a civilian can be tried under military law

Reference, please. Thanks!

 

[salarsikander]

Reference, please. Thanks!

Doctor,
Could shed some light on gcm or fcgm laws. Like what are these ?
I honestly have 0 idea

 

[Panther 57]

Reference, please. Thanks!

for PAF law refer section 70 and 71

 

[VCheng]

for PAF law refer section 70 and 71

Any link?

 

[Panther 57]

Any link?

no links you may have to search for it.

 

[VCheng]

no links you may have to search for it.

There is no discussion possible without such information being made available. It's okay by me.

BTW, the jurisdiction of the law you quoted is confined to PAF personnel only.

 

[Solomon2]

Big talk from a man who was a member of the groups that supported the dictators during their reign.

I am a strong advocate of assassinating anyone that betrays Pakistan where ever they may be.

Hmm. Is treason something defined under Article 6 of Pakistan's constitution or is it a matter of personal, political, or military whim? link

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Hmm. Is treason something defined under Article 6 of Pakistan's constitution or is it a matter of personal, political, or military whim? link

The prestige of the Pakistani Military was comparable to the end of the 71 war.

Memogate was all about reestablishing a new Civilian-Military apparatus, with the help of the United States. If Pakistani politicians couldn't do that at a time when the Pakistani Military was broken & demoralized, led by a Chief who was appointed due to his confidence in protecting his ex-boss, it wouldn't have launched a coup if it's life depended on it.

Then I wonder if all the talk about Pakistani Politicians being corrupt is actually true. I wouldn't compare Pakistani politicians to Francis Underwood, but it makes you wonder.

 

[Panther 57]

There is no discussion possible without such information being made available. It's okay by me.

BTW, the jurisdiction of the law you quoted is confined to PAF personnel only.

(dd) persons not otherwise subject to Air Force law who are accused of___

(i) seducing or attempting to seduce any person subject to this Act from his duty or allegiance to Government, or

(ii) having committed, in relation to any work of defence, arsenal, naval, military or air force establishment or station, ship or aircraft, or otherwise in relation to the naval military or air force affairs of Pakistan, an offence under the official Secrets Act, 1923 ;]
http://pakistancode.gov.pk/english/UY2FqaJw1-apaUY2Fqa-ap+Zag==-sg-jjjjjjjjjjjjj

(d) persons not otherwise subject to this Act who are accused of__

(i) seducing or attempting to seduce any person subject to this Act from his duty or allegiance to Government, or
(ii) having committed, in relation to any work of defence, arsenal, naval, military or air force establishment or station, ship or aircraft or otherwise in relation to the naval, military or air force affairs of Pakistan, an offence under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 1[,]
(iii) claiming or are known to belong to any terrorist group or organization using the name of religion or a sect; and

(a) raise arms or wage war against Pakistan, or attack the Armed Forces of Pakistan or law enforcement agencies, or attack any civil or military installations in Pakistan; or
(b) abduct any person for ransom, or cause death of any person or injury; or
(c) possess, store, fabricate or transport the explosives, fire arms, instruments, articles, suicide jackets; or
(d) use or design vehicles for terrorist acts; or
(e) provide or receive funding from any foreign or local source for the illegal activities under this clause; or
(f) act to over-awe the state or any section of the public or sect or religious minority; or
(g) create terror or insecurity in Pakistan or attempt to commit any of the said acts within or outside Pakistan,

shall be punished under this Act; and

(iv) claiming or are known to belong to any terrorist group or organization using the name of religion or a sect and raise arms or wage war against Pakistan, commit an offence mentioned at serial Nos. (i), (ii), (iii),(v),(vi), (vii), (viii), (ix), (x), (xi), (xii), (xiii), (xv), (xvi), (xvii) and (xx) in the Schedule to the Protection of Pakistan Act, 2014 (X of 2014):

Provided that any person who is alleged to have abetted, aided or conspired in the commission of any offence falling under sub-clause (iii) or sub-clause (iv) shall be tired under this Act wherever he may have committed that offence :

Provided further that no person accused of an offence falling under sub-clause (iii) or sub-clause (iv) shall be prosecuted without the prior sanction of the Federal Government.2[:]

["Provided further that not withstanding anything contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, any person arrested, detained or held in custody by the armed forces, civil armed forces or law enforcement agencies and kept under arrest, custody or detention before the coming into forces of the Pakistan army (Amendment) Act, 2015 (Act II of 2015) shall be deemed to have been arrested or detained pursuant to the provisions of this Act as amended by the Pakistan Army (Amendment) Act, 2015 (Act II of 2015) it the offence in respect of which such arrest or detention was made also constitures an offence reffered to in sub-clause (iii) or sub-clause (iv):
http://pakistancode.gov.pk/english/UY2FqaJw1-apaUY2Fqa-ap+YaQ==-sg-jjjjjjjjjjjjj
These are open ended inclusion of people not subject to the act(s)

 

[VCheng]

These are open ended inclusion of people not subject to the act(s)

Thank you for the proper text, but which one of these can be shown to apply to make the case that you indicated? HH may be subject to other laws, but a GCM is not one of them. Claiming an open ended extension of military law is a gross over-reach, but perhaps typical of the Pakistani mindset, and not legal.

Besides, attacking his person will do nothing to counter his views and their potential affect on US policies towards Pakistan. That can be done only by presenting better counter-arguments and better engagement with the US administration.

 

[Solomon2]

@Panther 57 : fascinating, I never knew this stuff before. I suppose some of it doesn't hold against Pakistan's current constitution, though much of it may remain intact.

While some aspects of "treachery" may still fall under this old law, the 1973 Constitution, as amended, is what specifies "high treason" so it's not at all clear to me if the military or this old law should have any hand in judging civilian leadership in this matter - especially civilian officials who choose to share information with declared allies.

 

[Panther 57]

@Panther 57 : fascinating, I never knew this stuff before. I suppose some of it doesn't hold against Pakistan's current constitution, though much of it may remain intact.

While some aspects of "treachery" may still fall under this old law, the 1973 Constitution, as amended, is what specifies "high treason" so it's not at all clear to me if the military or this old law should have any hand in judging civilian leadership in this matter - especially civilian officials who choose to share information with declared allies.

National Security should never be compromised. And there are no allies in today's geopolitical situation. As regard constitution. This constitution has been raped and molested multiple time by the elite to satisfy their lust for power and money. In my opinion this constitution is not for Pakistan but anti Pakistan. It should be abrogated and rewritten.

Thank you for the proper text, but which one of these can be shown to apply to make the case that you indicated? HH may be subject to other laws, but a GCM is not one of them. Claiming an open ended extension of military law is a gross over-reach, but perhaps typical of the Pakistani mindset, and not legal.

Besides, attacking his person will do nothing to counter his views and their potential affect on US policies towards Pakistan. That can be done only by presenting better counter-arguments and better engagement with the US administration.

There are no normal courts in armed forces only court martial. Legality ----- this law is not made by armed forces. These laws have been made by the then legislative assembly. Haqqani is guilty of issuing visas to intelligence agencies and passing them into pakistan outside the procedure of immigration, of course with connivance of the then President and PM. President is supreme commander therefore can be brought into the ambit of courtmartial

 

[VFY]

And there are no allies in today's geopolitical situation.

Absolutely. Pakistan has no allies, only partners. It can also be argued that Pakistan is a client state of the US, just like KSA, Israel, UAE, are also client states of the US.

If a country has a mutual defense agreement with another country, only then can they be considered actual allies.

 

[Panther 57]

Absolutely. Pakistan has no allies, only partners. It can also be argued that Pakistan is a client state of the US, just like KSA, Israel, UAE, are also client states of the US.

If a country has a mutual defense agreement with another country, only then can they be considered actual allies.

Even they are not allies. Just business partners guarding their own interests.