The startling story of how deposed CJ was shown as pro-terrorist
By Muhammad Ahmad Noorani
ISLAMABAD: The Bush administration, and the world, was deliberately and systematically presented a mutilated and distorted image of the deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, according to a well-planned strategy of the presidency so that Washington might not raise serious objections when the Nov 3 coup against the judges was carried out.
The main objective of this strategy was to convince the US that Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was soft on terrorists and could create serious problems by asking for the production and release of all missing persons, most of whom were handed over by Pakistan to the US.
Top government officials holding key positions in the previous government have revealed in separate interviews that the presidency had reached the conclusion that it had no option
but to take extra-constitutional steps to remove the apex court judges, which was impossible without taking the US into confidence.
According to these officials, the government had decided to take advantage of the missing personsí case, which was being heard by the apex court then.
A key plank of the strategy was to produce some of the missing persons but not provide any evidence to the court so, that the judges had no legal ground to keep them under detention. "The court was being forced to release these missing persons, which would then be presented as a proof of Justice Chaudhry's sympathy for terrorists," one official said.
The chief justice had smelled a *** while some lawyers had also warned Justice Chaudhry.
The CJ thought it might be a good idea to accept a request for a meeting pending with him from the US Ambassador Anne Patterson and explain the situation.
But he used the official procedure and asked the Pakistan Foreign Office to give clearance for the meeting, as was required under the rules.
But, according to the government strategy, this meeting could be damaging, so the Foreign Office did not give permission to the CJ to see the US ambassador. Accordingly, the CJ declined the meeting with Ambassador Patterson.
But the denial was presented by the Pakistani officials as part of Justice Chaudhry's anti-American tilt, an official said.
"Refusing a meeting with the US ambassador easily conveyed the wrong message to the US government that the sitting judiciary was adopting a hard line on the war on terror," the official added.
The chief justice had received the Saudi ambassador in Islamabad on December 8, 2007 but when a US diplomat was then asked whether Ambassador Patterson also wanted to see him, the diplomat was quoted as saying înoî.
While explaining his answer, the US diplomat had said that Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry had turned down the request for a meeting with the US ambassador twice after his re-instatement on July 20 and before the imposition of emergency on November 3.
"Now we don't feel any need to request for an appointment with Justice Iftikhar, as he may also refuse now," the senior US diplomat had told The News.
Deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, on knowing the US embassyís concerns, had informed two lawyers in contact with him about the actual situation. Justice Iftikhar told them that it was not he, but the Foreign Office that had instructed him not to meet the US ambassador.
"It is mandatory for any top official of the judiciary to inform the Foreign Office before meeting such a high-profile diplomatic official and especially in the situation the country was passing through.
On our intimation to the Foreign Office, we immediately received a message that we could not meet the US ambassador and subsequently there was no option other than regretting the US ambassador's request," Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry said in his message. The same situation was also conveyed to the US ambassador, credible sources told The News.
A senior government official told The News that when the Supreme Court started hearing the missing personsí case after the restoration of Chief Justice on July 20 last, the attorney general and other government officials repeatedly promised the court that they would provide credible evidence about the alleged involvement of these ëtracedí missing persons, but never did so.
According to reports, in the post-July 20 scenario, on the petitions filed by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and former senator and Pakistan People's Party's spokesman Farhatullah Babar, the cases of only three traced missing persons were decided and subsequently they were released,.
These were Naeem Noor Khan, Aleem Nasir and Hafiz Abdul Basit.
According to these reports Naeem Noor Khan, a computer expert and resident of Karachi, was released by the agencies holding him on the grounds that he had cooperated with them and because of his help, the agencies had managed to arrest Musaad Aruchi, who was alleged to be a senior member of the al-Qaeda leadership.
With the information provided by Naeem and his help, the UK police arrested a terror gang of 13 people.
The Supreme Court was informed on August 20 last that Naeem Noor Khan was released and had reached his home.
"The court was never provided with the details of the crimes in which Naeem was involved,
otherwise no judge could order the release of a person allegedly involved in such heinous crimes," a member of the bench hear-
ing the case told a senior
lawyer.
These facts are also evident from the record of the Supreme Court as well as from the media reports published in all the leading national dailies in the month of August 2007.
Aleem Nasir, a German national was arrested by the ISI from the Lahore Airport on July 18, 2007 while on his way to Germany on charges of smuggling precious stones and was missing from the same day.
He was never even charged by the government of being involved in some terrorist activity, according to a senior former official of the Supreme Court.
"The government did not come up with any proof against Aleem and he had to be released by the apex court on August 21, 2007," the official added.
The most important case was that of Hafiz Abdul Basit, who was allegedly involved in a terrorist attack on General Musharraf, according to the official.
Basit was arrested from Faisalabad by the police and was subsequently handed over to the Military Intelligence (MI) on Pindi Bhatian Interchange of Lahore-Islamabad Motorway on the instructions of the then additional inspector general of police Tariq Pervez, who was the DG-FIA at the time of hearing, as police officials themselves informed the court.
The attorney general was quoted by all the newspapers of Pakistan on August 21 and 22 as telling the apex court that
proof of his involvement in heinous crimes would be provided to the court. This was never done.
Attorney General for Pakistan Malik Muhammad Qayyum, when approached by this scribe last week, was asked why the Supreme Court was never provided with authentic proof of involvement of Basit, Aleem and others. His response was: "This is an old case and I don't remember anything about it."
Another important case heard along these three persons was that of Imran Munir, a Malaysian Pakistani.
According to one official, this case seriously damaged the
credibility of the whole process of detaining civilians by the secret agencies on terrorism charges.
"Imran was in love with the niece of Brig Mansoor of ISI. He was invited to dinner by Brig Mansoor and went missing from that day," Imran Munirís attorney, Mujeeb Pirzada told the Supreme Court on Aug 20, 2007 after Imran was traced in Mangla Cantt.
Imran's sister provided evidence that her brother loved the niece of Brig Mansoor of ISI. This she did outside the Supreme Court building the same day.
"This was the first incident which told the world that some of the missing persons in the custody of the intelligence agencies of Pakistan were not just terrorists but also lovers.
It was the worst case that demolished the credibility of the intelligence agencies," the former Supreme Court official said.
He added: "The most interesting point was that the government officials never came up with any allegation of involvement of Imran in any terrorist activity but shockingly he was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment by a military court, Field General Court Martial (FGCM), on spying charges. Loving a niece was equal to spying for a military court.î
This conviction had been set aside and his retrial was ordered by another military court, the SC official said. But this higher military court also did not order Imran's release because of the serious nature of allegations levelled against him.
According to the former senior official of the SC, the SC bench hearing these cases comprised the deposed Chief
Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Justice M Javed Buttar, Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk and Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed.
"The bench was of the view that all the missing persons should be produced before the court and should be prosecuted and kept in jail in accordance with the Constitution," the official said, adding: "The bench never made any observation indicating that it wanted the release of those persons involved in terrorist activities."
The official also repeated that the allegations regarding supporting terrorism were levelled by General Pervez Musharraf at the time of the imposition of emergency on Nov 3 against the apex judiciary was about the Lal Masjid case.
The official said it was worth mentioning that Justice Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and Justice Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, who first took suo-moto action and then heard the case, were both invited for taking oath under the PCO on Nov 3 last.
Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry himself had told The News on Nov 4 last that if any alleged terrorist was released by the Supreme Court, it was not the judgesí fault but the government never provided any evidence justifying the arrest.
He had then said: "I have never been lenient towards the terrorists but it was not possible for the judges of the Supreme Court to start punishing people without any evidence against them."
He had also revealed that out of his serious concern over terrorism, he set up a committee under him that included judges from each provincial high
court to expedite the terrorism cases.
Every month, he had said, the said committee used to meet and review the cases of terrorism
to ensure that there were no delays.
The official alleged all the drama of presenting some innocent people as alleged terrorists and criminals was part of a conspiracy against the country's judiciary to deceive the outside world that our judges were supporting terrorism and were hardliners.
The startling story of how deposed CJ was shown as pro-terrorist
