Memo report
THE memo commission report is finally out, and it holds Hussain Haqqani responsible for the infamous letter that asked America to rescue Pakistani from a coup. But the language of the findings, and the fact that they comment on matters well beyond the commission’s mandate, have failed to rescue this saga from the atmosphere of political controversy that has dogged it from the very beginning. The report goes beyond establishing “the origin, purpose and authenticity” of the memo. Even if Mr Haqqani is guilty, the commission was not asked to pass judgment on his conduct — a task that belongs to the Supreme Court bench hearing the case — which it effectively did by declaring his actions “acts of disloyalty to Pakistan”. The report also opines on what is and is not acceptable for a Pakistani ambassador to do in dealings with a foreign government, and comments on the suitabi-lity of appointing Mr Haqqani in the first place given what it sees as his weak links to Pakistan. While he wasn’t exactly cooperative with the investigation, these findings will only bolster allegations of bias in the way the probe was conducted, including concessions made to accommodate Mansoor Ijaz’s numerous demands about how and where he wanted to appear before the commission.
The problem with all of this is that it throws the fairness of the procedure into doubt in the midst of a case already fraught with politics, and raises questions about how it will colour the hearings to follow. It is obvious that the memo should not have been written; it asked a foreign country to intervene in Pakistan’s affairs, and particularly in matters having to do with the country’s security. But the amount of attention that was paid to the case by opposition politicians and the military had already prompted questions about the real motives behind the uproar. For that reason, it was extremely important that the investigation was, and was seen to be, unbiased. Unfortunately the commission’s conclusions focus on painting a damning personal portrait, which only makes this issue messier rather than helping to cleanly wind it up.
If Mr Hussain Haqqani is not loyal then questions should be asked to Mian Nawaz Sheriff that why did he appoint Mr Haqqani as an ambassador to Sri lanka. Moreover he was the President of Karachi University elected on Islami Jamiat Tulba a rightish wing from Jamaat e Islami. The Judges have no right to declare the loyalty of any Pakistani citizen..After all the Martial Laws were declared legal by these honorable Judges.
The report exposes the fallacy of a free, fair and independent judiciary. The CJP is absolutely not an angel as is being portrayed.
Kudos to DAWN for its balanced and correct editorial. Politics and personalities aside, the fact remains that during the Memo Commission proceedings,, Mr. Manzur failed to present any evidence whatsoever, written or verbal, that showed Mr Haqqani wrote or guided the contents of this memo or letter. No signature, handwriting, no voice or video recordings, no witnesses etc was presented in this case. As a lawyer may I point out that mere statements of Mr Manzur or record of date and time of his mobile calls without the contents of the phone calls is not evidence. The conclusion of the Memo Commission and the SC's order are a big joke and ridiculous according to law. It seems that the SC order to further proceed is an attempt to divert the attention of the public from the corruption and blackmail charges against the CJ and his son. Its a shame that CJ is not resigning in the face of this. Legal caliber and levels have really sunk so low in our country unfortunately.
Was it not always questionable, if not out right unjust to appoint a person of dubious credentials to the post of Pakistan"s ambassador? The commission has raised the same question and that is in no way a judgement. Any one who was followed Mr. Haqqani's shennnanigans over his entire career and especially during the last 8 years would have no difficulty in understanding his dubious and secretive dealings with the Americans. If you want only one piece of evidence, read his his testimony before the House Armed Services Committee given about about 7 years ago.
This was definitely a sham case and a sham investigation. Kudos to Dawn for pointing out the truth when no one in the land of the pure is ready to listen.
Infact HUSSAIN HAQQANI himself invited trouble by becoming ambassodor . The author of a book that exposes our establishment cant be for given.Those who violated constitution were given guard of honour those whoviolated socalled discipline were court martialled
I don't agree with Dawn's comments. It's surprising to know that the largely fair & balanced Dawn also has joined the bandwagon of conspiracy theorists accusing the judiciary of impropriety merely based on one assertion "the disloyalty of Pakistan".
It's also strange that the entire Memogate has been given a cold shoulder, on what should have clearly been a case of 'Treason".
Dawn is determined to act as bulwark against any broadside that is fired upon PPP govt from any quarter.
Making a diplomat the fall guy for the downturn in US-Pakistan relations ensures Patriotism comes to the fore, that the loss of face of Pak army is on the backburner when OBL was caught and karachi naval dock attacke at Mehran etc.
It serves the defence forces well to have this commission's findings. or does it? Looks like the people are finally catching onto the great game being now played out to divert attention…….