LONDON: Pakistan Muslim League-N leader Nawaz Sharif on Saturday has advised President Asif Ali Zardari to apologise from the nation and return all the looted fortunes of the country to its people. In a press conference held in London, the PML-N chief said that the president had breached all the promises and agreements in the past. Had Zardari restored the judiciary earlier as promised the nation would not be in such a mess, he added. He blamed the president for the crisis and said that he should not exploit the country for his own benefits. Nawaz said that Pakistan was in difficult situation and it was a high time to save the country. Pakistan needs a new social contract, he added.— Dawn News REFERENCES: Nawaz asks Zardari to apologise from nation http://public.dawn.com/2010/10/17/nawaz-asks-zardari-to-apologise-from-nation.html Zardari responsible for unstable country: Nawaz Published in The Express Tribune, October 18th, 2010. http://tribune.com.pk/story/63879/zardari-misusing-democracy/
Pakistan Social Contract had taken a hike when Sharif Brothers raised a very detrimental slogan "Jag Punjabi Jag" against the "Federation of Pakistan"
His Excellency should know (from reports filed by the US Consulate’s Political Officer at Lahore, surely) of the Punjab Government’s open revolt against the Federation, led by the Establishment’s then blue-eyed son, Nawaz Sharif, the Chief Minister of Punjab no less. As part of which mutiny Punjab government funds were used to foment rebellion against the “Sindhi Prime Minister” by printing and distributing flyers and buttons and bumper stickers and banners exhorting the Punjabis to wake-up. ‘Jag Punjabi Jag’ was the chilling slogan. REFERENCE: His Excellency holds forth by Kamran Shafi Saturday, December 17, 2005 http://kamranshafi.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_archive.html NRO/Jang Group: Kamran Khan, Nawaz Sharif & Ethnic Hatred. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2010/01/nrojang-group-kamran-khan-nawaz-sharif.html
Short Term Memory Loss of Sharif Brothers
It is unfortunate that cases sans evidence were instituted during his tenure, but it is heartening that he (Nawaz Sharif) has revealed the truth without any fear or reluctance. Just have a look at some other words of Nawaz Sharif in the same interview. Sharif says: “I was not in favour of arresting Benazir Bhutto, but Saifur Rehman would insist upon her arrest. Ch Shujaat Hussain is witness to this fact that I wanted Benazir Bhutto to go abroad before being sentenced. In fact, I never wanted her to go to jail.” REFERENCES: Ghaddar Kaun? Author: Sohail Warraich – Nawaz Sharif opens up to Sohail Warraich in a big way READ THE BOOK sohail waraich – ghaddar kaun – Memory Loss of Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, Mehran Bank Scandal & Barrister Akram Sheikh http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2010/10/memory-loss-of-chaudhry-nisar-ali-khan.html
Nawaz Sharif’s alliance with Musharraf League: Where are the principles now?
LAHORE: Two senators of the former ruling party PML-Q met Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif to discuss economic and political crisis faced by the country. Senator S.M Zafar and Tariq Azeem held a meeting with Shahbaz Sharif on Sunday. Opposition Leader in the National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar, Khwaja Asif and Senator Ishaq Dar also attended the meeting. The meeting discussed the role political parties could play for the betterment of the country. The meeting also agreed that the federal government should change its attitude and play a positive role by implementing the orders of the judiciary.—Dawn News - REFERENCE: PML-Q leaders discuss political crisis with Shahbaz Sunday, 17 Oct, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/12-pml-q+leaders+discuss+political+crisis+with+shahbaz--bi-02
“Meesaq-e-Pakistan” OK but it is only possible with PML-Q i.e. Musharraf League and Pagara League [would Sharif Brothers accept Chaudhrys, Mushahid and other "Lotas] What a joke “Nawaz Sharif Demads Treason Trial against Musharraf” and his younger brother holds “Political Meeting” with “Musharraf League” How the Q-League came into being:) Watch the Dawn News on “Horse Trading” and back-door Politics to remove the government. “Meesaq-e-Pakistan” Code Name: IJI of 21st Century but which Bank because Mehran Bank is no more:)
A general election was held in Pakistan on 18 February 2008, after being postponed from 8 January 2008. The original date was intended to elect members of the National Assembly of Pakistan, the lower house of the Majlis-e-Shoora (the nation’s parliament). This DAWN News TV Investigation Report was aired just before that election and features people who have affected past elections and Pakistan’s democratic process in many ways including General Ali Kuli Khan Khattak, General Hamid Gul, Maj (Retd) Masood Sharif Khan Khattak, General Roedad Khan, Air Marshall Asghar Khan, Brig Imtiaz Ahmed, Maj Aamir and more. One of the main topics is Midnight Jackals, an operation conducted by the Intelligence Bureau to thwart an attempt to overthrow the democratically elected government of Benazir Bhutto. Other topics include the rigging of elections, involvement of the Pakistan Army in democracy and elections, intelligence agencies involvement in elections and democracy and more. REFERENCE: DAWN News TV Investigation Report with Masood Sharif – 6th January 2008 http://www.sharifpost.com/2008/01/06/dawn-news-tv-investigation-report/
[NOTE: Hamid Gul admits that ISI political role was pre Bhutto DAWN News TV Investigation Report with Masood Sharif -- 6th January 2008]
ISLAMABAD: The main wheeler and dealer of the ISI during the 2002 elections, the then Maj-Gen Ehtesham Zamir, now retired, has come out of the closet and admitted his guilt of manipulating the 2002 elections, and has directly blamed Gen Musharraf for ordering so. Talking to The News, the head of the ISI’s political cell in 2002, admitted manipulating the last elections at the behest of President Musharraf and termed the defeat of the King’s party, the PML-Q, this time “a reaction of the unnatural dispensation (installed in 2002).” Zamir said the ISI together with the NAB was instrumental in pressing the lawmakers to join the pro-Musharraf camp to form the government to support his stay in power. Looking down back into the memory lane and recalling his blunders which, he admitted, had pushed the country back instead of taking it forward, Zamir feels ashamed of his role and conduct. Massively embarrassed because he was the one who negotiated, coerced and did all the dirty work, the retired Maj-Gen said he was not in a position to become a preacher now when his own past was tainted. He said the country would not have faced such regression had the political management was not carried out by the ISI in 2002. But he also put some responsibility of the political disaster on the PML-Q as well. The former No: 2 of the ISI called for the closure of political cell in the agency, confessing that it was part of the problem due to its involvement in forging unnatural alliances, contrary to public wishes. Zamir’s blaming Musharraf for creating this unnatural alliance rings true as another former top associate of Musharraf, Lt-Gen (retd) Jamshed Gulzar Kiyani has already disclosed that majority of the corps commanders, in several meetings, had opposed Musharraf’s decision of patronising the leadership of the King’s party. “We had urged Musharraf many times during the corps commanders meeting that the PML-Q leadership was the most condemned and castigated personalities. They are the worst politicians who remained involved in co-operative scandals and writing off loans. But Musharraf never heard our advice,” Kiyani said while recalling discussions in their high profile meetings. REFERENCE: The man, who rigged 2002 polls, spills the beans By Umar Cheema Sunday, February 24, 2008 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=13159&Cat=13&dt=2/24/2008
[NOTE: Hamid Gul admits that ISI political role was pre Bhutto DAWN News TV Investigation Report with Masood Sharif -- 6th January 2008]
He said one of their colleagues, who was an accountability chief at that time, had sought permission many times for proceeding against the King’s party top leaders but was always denied. Kiyani asked Musharraf to quit, the sooner the better, as otherwise the country would be in a serious trouble. Ma-Gen (retd) EhteshamZamir termed the 2008 elections ‘fairer than 2002’. He said the reason behind their fairness is that there was relatively less interference of intelligence agencies this time as compared to the last time. But he stopped short of saying that there was zero interference in the 2008 polls. “You are quite right,” he said when asked to confirm about heavy penetration of ISI into political affairs during the 2002 elections. But he said he did not do it on his own but on the directives issued by the government. Asked who directed him from the government side and if there was somebody else, not President Musharraf, he said: “Obviously on the directives of President Musharraf.” Asked if he then never felt that he was committing a crime by manipulating political business at the cost of public wishes, he said: “Who should I have told except myself. Could I have asked Musharraf about this? I was a serving officer and I did what I was told to do. I never felt this need during the service to question anyone senior to me,” he said and added that he could not defend his acts now. REFERENCE: The man, who rigged 2002 polls, spills the beans By Umar Cheema Sunday, February 24, 2008 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=13159&Cat=13&dt=2/24/2008
[NOTE: Hamid Gul admits that ISI political role was pre Bhutto DAWN News TV Investigation Report with Masood Sharif -- 6th January 2008]
“It was for this reason that I have never tried to preach others what I did not practice. But I am of the view that the ISI’s political cell should be closed for good by revoking executive orders issued in 1975,” he said. Responding to a question regarding corruption cases that were used as pressure tactics on lawmakers, he said: “Yes! This tool was used, not only by the ISI. The NAB was also involved in this exercise.” Former corps commander of Rawalpindi, Lt-Gen (retd) Jamshed Gulzar Kiyani said majority of corps commanders had continued opposing Musharraf’s alliance with top leadership of the PML-Q. “Not just in one meeting, we opposed his alignment with these corrupt politicians in many meetings but who cared. Now Musharraf has been disgraced everywhere, thanks to his political cronies.” REFERENCE: The man, who rigged 2002 polls, spills the beans By Umar Cheema Sunday, February 24, 2008 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=13159&Cat=13&dt=2/24/2008
“Meesaq-e-Pakistan” OK but with whom because it was the Government of Nawaz Sharif in 1992 which Launched Military Operation against MQM"
NOTE: Due to current Judicial Crisis created by GEO/JANG/THE NEWS INTERNATIONAL, many links of The News International which are quoted below are DEAD - The Jang Group has removed all such Links from their website to evade Legal Action from Judiciary. Also note the Dirty Role which is being played by the Jang Group's Correspondent Mr. Ansar Abbasi in the news filed by him.
ISLAMABAD: No matter who has authored the script of the ongoing Brig Imtiaz tamasha, engulfing the political arena, the establishment that includes the military-led intelligence agencies and the Pakistan Army have emerged as the main villains, presumably as the authors of the fiasco wanted. Nawaz Sharif and his party are uncomfortable; demand for Musharraf’s trial has been sidetracked at least for the time being; the MQM gets into a position where it believes that its stand is vindicated but the Jinnahpur controversy also created an opportunity for its opponents for a much open criticism of the party and its policies; the issues like the scrapping of 17th Amendment have now become more complex with the two leading parties setting up for a political confrontation after the PML-N finds the Presidency behind the current smear campaign against its top leadership; however, President Asif Zardari is least affected by this recently started political wrangling. It rather has favoured him by temporarily silencing the guns that were targeting him and the government from all around for their alleged misrule, on charges of corruption, the sugar scandal and the reported ruining of the state institutions. The PML-N, which is badly hurt by the revelations about the alleged provision of Rs3.5 million to its party chief Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif by former ISI chief Lt-Gen (retd) Asad Durrani, is pointing its finger at the president to have been the architect of the get-Nawaz campaign. However, the Presidency has strongly refuted these charges but different presidential aides are issuing the kind of statements that apparently show the presidency is getting amused with the situation. However, what is interesting is the unanimity between all these warring political forces showing their abhorrence over the role of the establishment in country’s politics. But in a strange dichotomy except the PML-N, the other two major warring political forces — the PPP and the MQM — are not interested in proceeding against Gen (retd) Musharraf under Article 6 of the Constitution. As one scans through the debates that took place in different talk shows of various private television channels after the recent emergence of the Jinnahpur controversy, the establishment is found to be the target of all.
The MQM, which had been the most trusted supporter of Gen Musharraf during his nine years rule, says that its Quaid Altaf Hussain is not returning to Pakistan because of the establishment. The PPP, too, said that the military operators and intelligences agencies have not been adhering to the command of the civilian governments whereas the PML-N is of the view that it has repeatedly found the establishment and Army chiefs overstretching their mandate. While appearing as a guest in one of the talk shows, PML-N information secretary Ahsan Iqbal has said it has been a harsh reality in Pakistan that policy decisions on some specific security and international issues have not been taken with the consultation or consent of the civilian government. He quoted the Kargil issue as one example and urged upon the need of rationalising the power structure in such a manner that no step could be taken against the wishes of the democratic government.
He said the PML-N differed with former Army chief Gen (retd) Aslam Beg after he issued a statement on the Gulf war that did not match the government’s policy. He said similarly Gen (retd) Asif Nawaz exceeded from the mandate he was given before launching the military operation against criminals, dacoits and anti-social elements in Sindh in 1992. Another Army Chief Gen (retd) Jehangir Karamat, he said, was removed because of his statement on the setting up of National Security Council. He said the PML-N government differed with Gen (retd) Musharraf on the Kargil issue. Senior PML-N leader Khwaja Muhammad Asif was of the view that the military-led intelligence agencies have been extremely powerful and instrumental in the making and breaking of the government. On the issue of the military operation in Karachi and the target killings there, Khwaja Asif said the agencies were mainly responsible for that. He said in both the 1992-93 and 1995-96 operations in Karachi, these were the military intelligence agencies that had played the important role. Interestingly, it was Khwaja Asif, who admitted that had the agencies not been so powerful MQM Quaid Altaf Hussain would have now been in Pakistan. Khwaja Asif said Altaf Hussain’s apprehensions towards the intelligences agencies, are barring him to come back and lead his party, which according to the N-leader would serve the political culture better.
Khwaja Asif also pointed out that the present situation in the tribal areas, Balochistan, Northern Areas and in Southern Punjab is also the outcome of what the agencies did during the last 20-22 years. The PML-N leaders have been distancing itself from the 1992 military operation against the MQM and insisted that it was the Army which had overstepped. In return, the MQM leaders, too, were mainly complaining to the PML-N and its leader Nawaz Sharif over his silence and the failure to stop the 1992 military operation against the MQM. MQM leader Haider Abbas Rizvi endorsed Khwaja’s views and said Hakim Saeed was killed by the agencies but the MQM was blamed for his murder. He lamented that the MQM workers were killed in an extra-judicial manner; military courts were created to try Muttahida workers, who were punished illegally and in violation of the Constitution through summary trials by these courts. Rizvi said in the 1992 operation what he called the Haqiqi terrorists were riding in military jeeps during the Army’s operation against the MQM. “It was all planted,” he said, and lamented the then-prime minister could not do anything to stop the operation.
Wasim Akhtar, another MQM leader, said in one the private channel that it’s a pity that the largest political parties of the country are today still dependent on Army and America. Dr Nadeem Ahsan of the MQM said MQM workers do not want Altaf Hussain to come back. He said the MQM Chief’s life is facing threats from the enemies of Pakistan. When asked to name these enemies, he pointed to both internal and external forces. When further probed, Dr Nadeem Ahsan initially named the Taliban and later said, “There are some other forces too. You can also name establishment.” When asked if the MQM fears from the establishment, he said, “Yes”. PPP information secretary Fauzia Wahab, too, in a talkshow talked of the political influence of the ISI which, according to her, grew after the agencies exposure in the Afghan war against former Soviet Union. Wahab, who is generally considered as her master’s (President) voice, said during the Afghan war the ISI became very resourceful and developed new technologies, which the agencies has to use somewhere to prove its worth. Referring to the history and also finding it true in the present day Pakistan, she said one thing is clear that in Pakistan democracy never got strengthened and the civilian authority has never been maintained. She said in her view there does not exist any central authority. Fauzia Wahab also added the 1992 operation is the reflection of the fact that the military operators at that time were not ready to concede the supremacy of the civilian leadership. She, however, believed the military interventions can’t be stopped by hanging a dictator but by improving the performance of parliament and through the vision and greater assertion of the political leadership. Dr Firdous Aashiq Awan, another PPP leader, blamed the establishment for the PPP government’s “mistake” to launch operation in Karachi against the MQM in 1995-96. REFERENCE: Establishment — the main target in current fiasco Wednesday, September 02, 2009 Politicians point finger at Army, ISI for debacles; all except the president are losers By Ansar Abbasi http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=24254&Cat=13&dt=9%2F2%2F2009
LAHORE: The much trumpeted 1992 operation clean-up in Sindh had actually been launched against the backdrop of the infamous ‘Major Kaleem kidnapping case’, when a serving Army major was abducted and tortured, allegedly by a group of activists belonging to the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (which was then known as the Muhajir Qaumi Movement). While the MQM leadership has recently blamed former prime minister Nawaz Sharif for the 1992 operation and asked him to apologise for the atrocities committed during his tenure, it remains a fact that the MQM high command had held at that time the military leadership responsible for the action, saying it actually wanted to avenge the honour of Major Kaleemuddin. As a matter of fact, Major Kaleemuddin of the Field Investigation Unit (FIU) of the Army had been tasked to restore peace in the trouble-stricken Landhi area of Karachi. He was abducted on June 20, 1991, along with a few subordinates, while in civvies ñ the night when the MQM-Haqiqi led by Afaq Ahmed made an abortive attempt to take over Landhi offices of the Altaf-led MQM, called Muhajir Khel. This led to a bloody gun battle between the two MQM factions, killing many from both sides. However, the Haqiqi group was forced to flee after the Altaf group unleashed all its fire power in the gun battle. A few hours after the abortive attempt by the Haqiqi group, Major Kaleemuddin was abducted from the Landhi area by armed activists of the MQM, who allegedly took him to a torture cell and subjected him to ‘mistreatment’. The Major Kaleemuddin kidnapping case is still described by many in the establishment as the bedrock of the subsequent military operations carried out against the MQM under the Sharif and the Bhutto governments. Altaf Hussain and several other MQM leaders and workers were subsequently accused of being involved in the kidnapping episode and named in the FIR registered on June 24, 1991. Altaf left Pakistan in December 1992.
But there are different versions of what exactly happened to Major Kaleemuddin. Some of the MQM leaders had claimed after the incident that the abductors were under the impression that MQM-Haqiqi leaders Afaq Ahmed and Amir Khan – had returned to the port city at the behest of the agencies and that the major was present in Landhi to supervise the establishment-sponsored operation against them. During the court trial, many of the accused had claimed that since the major was in plain clothes, he was mistaken by them for a Haqiqi activist and subsequently roughed up. But as soon he had revealed his identity, the major was allowed to go. However, according to the prosecution, Major Kaleemuddin, along with three other Army officers, was patrolling the Landhi area in an Army jeep when 20 armed youths took them hostage after seizing their weapons. The Army men were taken to a place called Muhajir Khel in Landhi where they were allegedly tortured and kept for seven hours and rescued when the police reached the place. The accused charged with kidnapping the Army officers and torturing them included Altaf Hussain, Saleem Shahzad, Dr Imran Farooq, Safdar Baqri, Nadeem Ayubi, Ayub Shah, Aftab Ahmed, Ismail alias Sitara, Ashraf Zaidi, Sajid Azad, Ashfaq Chief, Javed Kazmi, Haji Jalal Asghar Chacha, Rehan Zaidi and Mohammad Yousuf.
Whatever the truth might be, the then-Army high command’s keen interest in the prosecution of the accused gave an impression as if the traditional martial pride of the Khakis – that nobody gets away with bashing up an Army officer ñ was at work. Gen Asif Nawaz had been the Corps Commander Karachi at that time who got promoted as the Army Chief in August 1991, right before the start of the military operation. A special court for suppression of terrorist activities (STA), led by Justice Rafiq Awan, began hearing of the Kaleemuddin kidnapping case in March 1993 and delivered judgment on June 9, 1994. The court had convicted Ashfaq Chief, Javed Kazmi and Haji Jalal and sentenced them to 30 years of rigorous imprisonment, besides imposing a fine of Rs 20,000 each under the Pakistan Penal Code, the Hudood Ordinance. All other accused, including Altaf Hussain, were declared absconders and sentenced to 27 years jail and a fine of Rs 30,000 each in absentia. Almost three years later, following the 1997 general elections and the subsequent decision by Altaf Hussain to join hands with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, all the convicted MQM leaders and activists challenged afresh their conviction and sentences before the Sindh High Court. Their appeal was heard by a division bench, which found the case as one ‘of almost no legal evidence’. Relying on the provisions of the Suppression of Terrorist Activities Act, 1976, the bench upheld on trial in absentia as well as the right of the absentee accused to file an appeal. Dealing with evidence, the bench observed that the eyewitnesses’ account did not inspire confidence and the evidence of the complainant was, in particular, full of contradictions.
The bench, comprising Justice Nizam Hussain Siddiqui and Justice Abdul Hameed, noted that it is difficult to believe, a group of 15 or 20 boys could disarm four trained soldiers. Therefore, all the accused were acquitted and three convicts serving their term were ordered to be released immediately. But it is interesting to point out that after AQ Halepota, one of the counsels for the MQM leaders, concluded his arguments before the court, the then-advocate-general Sindh Shaukat Zuberi submitted that numerous omissions and contradictions had been made during the trial of Major Kaleemuddin’s kidnapping and torture case and that he would not support the convictions of the accused by the STA court. The verdict came hardly a week after the then-prime minister Nawaz Sharif had travelled to London to meet Altaf Hussain. To recall, the MQM and the PML-N had been coalition partners at that time, before finally falling apart following the assassination of Hakim Mohammad Saeed in Karachi. Major Kaleemuddin had subsequently challenged the acquittal of the MQM leaders and activists by the Sindh High Court. But the petition was dismissed as withdrawn by the apex court on August 13, 2007, mainly due to non-prosecution, as neither the petitioner nor his counsel had turned up. REFERENCE: MQM Shifts Blame for 1992 Operation From Military to Nawaz Sharif By Amir Mir The News, Daily Jang September 02, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=24255&Cat=13&dt=9%2F2%2F2009 - Also, see the Urdu Edition (You’d miss that on jang.com.pk, once again bias Jang has removed content) Also, see the Urdu Edition: http://www.haqeeqat.org/2009/09/02/mqm-shifts-blame-for-1992-operation-from-military-to-nawaz-sharif/#urdu
LAHORE: The present animosity between the Altaf-led MQM and the Sharif-led PML has more to do with the October 1998 murder of former Sindh governor Hakim Mohammad Said and the subsequent imposition of the Governorís Rule in the province by the then prime minister Nawaz Sharif, rather than the 1992 operation clean-up, following which the two parties had mended fences and joined hands to form coalition governments in Sindh and at the federal level. The MQM is swinging between the PML and the PPP since the restoration of democracy in Pakistan in 1988, by joining almost every ruling coalition in Sindh. Having joined hands with then prime minister Benazir Bhutto after the 1988 elections, the MQM walked out of the PPP-led coalition in Sindh and at the centre in 1989. After the 1990 elections, the MQM teamed up with the Sharif-led PML, but left the coalition in 1992. After the dismissal of the second Benazir government in November 1996 and the subsequent holding of the 1997 general elections, Nawaz Sharif and Altaf Hussain had again joined forces against their common rival PPP.
On February 21, 1997, the MQM leadership signed a power sharing accord with new prime minister Nawaz Sharif and joined the coalition government at the federal level and in Sindh. As per the accord, Nawaz Sharif had agreed to hold a judicial probe into the deaths of ìhundreds of MQM workers in police custody or fake encounters besides granting compensation to the families of the deceasedî. Interestingly, the PML-MQM did not mention the 1992 military operation, for which the MQM now blames the PML. The first major development that followed the PML-MQM reunion was the Sindh High Courtís February 1997 decision to acquit Altaf Hussain and his 18 co-accused in the kidnapping and torture case of Major Kaleemuddin of the Field Intelligence Unit (FIU) of the Pakistan Army. The acquittal only became possible after Advocate General Sindh Shaukat Zuberi had submitted before the court that numerous omissions and contradictions had been made during the trial and that he would not support the convictions of the accused by a special court for suppression of terrorist activities.
On April 1, 1997, the PML-MQM coalition government in Sindh announced the formation of a compensation committee to pay compensation to the members of the affected families and their legal heirs ìwho had suffered during the period October 1993 to November 1997î. Once again, there was no mention of the year 1992 when the infamous operation clean up was launched by the Pakistan Army in Sindh. This was despite the fact that the operation clean-up had started in the rural areas of Sindh on May 23, 1992 and in the urban areas of the province on June 19, 1992. The operation had cost the government over Rs 4 billion since 45,000 military and para-military troops of the Corps V were deployed in Sindh to assist the civil administration in restoring peace. As a follow up to the PML-MQM power sharing accord of February 21, 1997, the Sharif government subsequently paid a hefty amount of Rs 500 million from the federal kitty as compensation to the families of 711 MQM activists who had either been killed or left disabled. However, the London-based MQM leadership now claims that around 15,000 MQM workers and supporters had lost their lives in the aftermath of the 1992 operation clean up. Interestingly, the MQM workers were not the only ones to have been compensated by the then Sharif government. A sum of Rs 200 million was also distributed as compensation money amongst 634 bereaved families of the Army, Rangers and the Police Jawans who had lost their lives between May 1992 and April 1998 in ìanti-terrorist operationsî carried out in Sindh.
To the amazement of many, the families of those killed (MQM-A workers) and those who had been blamed for their deaths (law enforcement agencies) were paid an equal compensation amount of Rs 300,000 each by the Sharif government. While the widows and other dependents of the army, rangers and police Jawans were given compensation money because they had lost their lives ìfighting terrorismî, the family members of the MQM-A workers were compensated for their ìextra-judicial killings by the law enforcement agencies.î But the most astonishing aspect of the whole episode was that the army had claimed a head money reward of Rs 5 million from the Sindh government for killing 368 desperados during the 1992 operation clean-up, including several MQM-A activists whose families had to be paid compensation money eventually. The PML-MQM coalition went smooth afterwards for almost a year, before some serious differences erupted between the two partners, making the MQM to quit the federal and Sindh governments in August 1998. Yet on September 20, 1998, the MQM resumed support to the PML government at federal level and in Sindh, but without joining the cabinets. However, their alliance came to an abrupt end following the October 17, 1998 murder of the former Sindh governor Hakim Mohammad Said, who was allegedly assassinated by MQM activists in Karachi. The main accused in the murder case was Zulfiqar Haider, a serving MPA of the MQM from the Sindh Assembly. On October 28, 1998, ten days after the murder and having received the initial inquiry report from the authorities, Nawaz Sharif accused the MQM legislator and seven other party activists of involvement in the Hakim Said murder and set a three-day deadline for Altaf Hussain to handover the killers, including the MPA, failing which he threatened to call-off the PML-MQM alliance. On October 31, 1998, following the MQM leadershipís refusal to meet the deadline, the then prime minister Nawaz Sharif imposed federal rule in Sindh, which was followed by a massive crackdown by the security agencies against the MQM, which led to a fresh round of hostilities between the two political parties whose leadership is at daggers drawn against each other even today. REFERENCE: The real cause of MQM-PML hostility Thursday, September 03, 2009 By Amir Mir http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=196296&Cat=2&dt=9%2F3%2F2009
Befitting Reply of MQM to Stephen Sackur in BBC HARDtalk Part 1
REFERENCES: Pakistan: Imran Farooq murder linked to rows within MQM Vikram Dodd, crime correspondent guardian.co.uk, Sunday 26 September 2010 20.28 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/26/pakistan-imran-farooq-murder-mqm The Karachi king After a bloody conflict in Karachi, much-feared political boss Altaf Hussain fled to London, but he is no less powerful in Pakistan Mustafa Qadri guardian.co.uk, Monday 6 July 2009 18.00 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/06/altaf-hussain-karachi-pakistan-london Pakistan: Information on Mohajir/Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Altaf (MQM-A) http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/publisher,USCIS,,,414fe5aa4,0.html
Befitting Reply of MQM to Stephen Sackur BBC HARDtalk Part 2
REFERENCE: Running Karachi - from London By Isambard Wilkinson in Karachi and Damien McElroy Published: 12:01AM BST 14 May 2007 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551540/Running-Karachi-from-London.html
Running Pakistan's biggest city - from London By Alastair Lawson BBC News, London Last Updated: Wednesday, 16 May 2007, 11:33 GMT 12:33 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6658231.stm The Karachi ruling party ‘run like the mafia’ from an office block in London · MQM accused of planning carnage which left 42 dead · Khan calls for leader in UK to face anti-terror charges Declan Walsh in Karachi and Matthew Taylor The Guardian, Saturday 2 June 2007 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/02/uk.pakistan Pakistan: Information on Mohajir/Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Altaf (MQM-A) http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/publisher,USCIS,,,414fe5aa4,0.html
ISLAMABAD: No Mr Altaf Hussain, you are wrong. Your recipe to cleanse the Augean stables is flawed, unconstitutional and simply shocking. Your outburst negates the established principles of rule of law that is mandatory for justice and fair play in any society and for which we have been struggling since March 9, 2007. You have not only unmistakably invited ML but proposed dictatorial rule of one man that would be disastrous for my Pakistan. One’s despondency and disappointment from the Zardari-Gilani government to which Altaf Bhai’s MQM is an integral part is perhaps far more grave than what the MQM chief apparently claims. Undoubtedly the present regime is thoroughly corrupt and the worst example of bad governance. Time has also proved that Prime Minister Gilani is also helpless, hopeless, incompetent and lacks courage and is a mere burden on the system for his inaction and incapability to steer the country away from the challenges facing the nation. This is known to all that democracy is being used by the present rulers to give cover to their corruption, misrule and bad governance. Everyone knows that Zardari and the bunch of corrupt coterie surrounding him are on a suicide mission and have emerged as the greatest threat to democracy. The question that arises here is if, because of corruption, bad-governance and misrule of the rulers and regime, we should condemn democracy and let another dictator come, it would ruin everything. Targeting democracy would mean bowing down to whims and wishes of one man, moving against our own rights, abrogating Constitution and weakening institutions including independent judiciary and free media. It sounds strange that no-confidence against the system is coming from Altaf Hussain whose party is vital part of the corrupt federal as well as Sindh government. Being part of it, the MQM is bound to share the burden of all the wrongs being done by the Zardari-Gilani duo. Instead of targeting democracy, why don’t Altaf Bhai and his party hit the corrupt government and the corrupt rulers? The MQM, which has served as B-Team of General Musharraf during his nine-year dictatorial rule, should now serve democracy and as a first step get out of the coalition. The party can also exert pressure on the regime to behave by setting the conditions of good governance, across the board accountability and corruption free government if the PPP wants the MQM to stay in the coalition.
Following democratic norms, the MQM has the option of leaving the federal government. It would mean the immediate collapse of the Gilani regime. The PPP, which has just 126 members in the National Assembly and has made the government with the support of MQM, ANP, JUI(F), independents and others, can’t survive if it loses the support of 25 MQM MNAs. The collapse of the government could pave the way for re-adjustments of political divide within the National Assembly. It would mean forming a new government. Otherwise, we have mid-term elections. These are all democratic means to handle the kind of situation we are confronting today. Hatred against Zardari should not be allowed to turn into hatred against democracy. Just to recall Altaf Bhai, the present lot ruling the country had made its way into the corridors of power because of the NRO, which was promulgated and negotiated by the Generals. Therefore, Altaf Bhai, please let the cleansing be done by the system instead of the Generals, who have failed every time they ruled the country. Let’s start differentiating between democracy and government. We have the kind of rulers who have given us the sham democracy. Instead of reverting to the military rule we all should struggle for genuine democracy, genuine people who should serve people instead of serving the rulers. REFERENCE: MQM must push for a change within the system; Altaf Bhai should leave coalition first; force mid-term polls, not invite a dictator Tuesday, August 24, 2010 By Ansar Abbasi http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-126-MQM-must-push-for-a-change-within-the-system;-Altaf-Bhai-should-leave-coalition-first;-force-mid-term-polls-not-invite-a-dictator Wednesday, September 01, 2010, Ramzan 21, 1431 A.H http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/sep2010-daily/01-09-2010/main.htm
ISLAMABAD: In a major political development, the PML-N and the MQM have developed channels of interaction likely to be visible soon when the two parties would not press their respective privilege motions against each other in the National Assembly. However, there still exists a level of hesitation between the two sides to frankly and freely talk about future cooperation, which if matures at a later stage might rattle the Gilani regime. At this stage, both the parties do not have the kind of comfort level where they can discuss the issue of in-house change. Background interaction with some key members of these two political parties reveal that two influential senators, one from each party, are presently in touch with each other to cool down the tempers, which ran high of late after the controversial statement of the MQM Chief Altaf Hussain. A source said that both the parties were inclined not to press their respective privilege motions in the forthcoming session of the National Assembly that was requisitioned by the PML-N to discuss the flood and devastation caused by this natural calamity. “There is also a possibility of the two parties withdrawing their privilege motions,” the source said, adding that after the detailed interview of the MQM chief on Geo and his clarification that his statement did not mean to invite martial law, the controversy stands settled. There is also realisation on both sides that at this critical juncture when almost 20 million Pakistanis are affected by the floods, they should discuss the flood situation in the forthcoming session instead of getting involved into a verbal war of accusations and counter accusations against each other.
When asked about the future cooperation between the two sides for a possible in-house change, a senior MQM leader said that the party would not like to go for any such thing while staying in the government. The Karachi situation and the future of democratic system, according to the MQM leader, are their concerns. “We don’t want to do anything that may shake the system or lead to a deterioration in law and order situation in Sindh,” the MQM source said. However, the MQM is willing to weigh different options. The PML-N too is not showing any immediate sign of taking initiative for an in-house change but the kind of frustration and despondency the party has developed vis-‡-vis the Gilani government is expected to lead to some upheavals in the political arena. The PML-N and the MQM have been coalition partners in both terms of Nawaz Sharif as Prime Minister. However, the relations between the two parties touched all time low when in an APC called by Nawaz Sharif in London in 2007, a resolution was passed against the MQM for its alleged involvement in 12 May, 2007 massacre. REFERENCE: PML-N, MQM relations warming up Wednesday, September 01, 2010 By Ansar Abbasi http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=280&Cat=13&dt=1%2F1%2F2011
LAHORE: The decision to launch the infamous 1992 operation clean-up in Sindh was largely taken by the military establishment immediately after the retirement of General Mirza Aslam Beg as the Army chief and the elevation of the then chief of general staff General Asif Nawaz Janjua to his place in August 1991. General Janjua had been the corps commander Karachi for three years from April 1988 to March 1991 before being elevated as chief of general staff in April 1991 for a brief period, only to be made the 10th chief of army staff three months later on August 16, 1991. And the operation clean-up was launched shortly afterwards. A careful scanning of the Pakistani newspaper files between 1989 and 1992 show that a proposal to send in the Army to ‘clean up’ Sindh was first floated in 1989 when Ghulam Ishaq Khan was the president of the country, Benazir Bhutto the prime minister, General Aslam Beg the Army chief and Lt-Gen Asif Nawaz the corps commander Karachi. However, difference of opinion arose after Ghulam Ishaq and General Aslam Beg opposed the suggestion. It was during his tenure as the corps commander Karachi that Asif Nawaz shot to prominence. Sindh at that time wilted under the most violent period in its history. Ethnic battles between Sindhis and Mohajirs were a routine affair and Asif Nawaz was often asked by the civil administration to deploy his troops to impose curfew and break the civil strife.
On one such occasion, Lt-Gen Asif Nawaz had to personally come forward as a guarantor between two ethnic extremist groups to ensure a safe swapping of the hostages from both sides, who otherwise would have been killed. Therefore, he had floated a proposal to the PPP government in 1989 for carrying out two separate operations in urban and rural areas of Sindh against extremist elements in the Mohajir Qaumi Movement (MQM) and Al-Zulfiqar Organisation as well as against criminals and dacoits who had been enjoying the protection of influential political personalities and landlords. However, Beg reportedly voiced his opposition to the proposal and simply dragged his feet by demanding Herculean powers from the federal government for the Army under Section 245 of the Constitution. Even otherwise, there were elements in the Bhutto government who argued that a genuinely impartial military operation, cutting across party and ethnic lines, as envisioned by Asif Nawaz, would shake the foundations of the entire political edifice. However, the ground work preceding the military operation in Sindh was eventually started in August 1991 soon after Aslam Begís retirement and Asif Nawazís elevation by Ishaq Khan. After taking Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif into confidence, the military high command had issued directives to the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Military Intelligence (MI) to prepare secret reports on the activities of dacoits, criminals, terrorists as well as political elements patronising notorious elements in Sindh. A separate cell was formed within these agencies to focus on the activities of the Altaf-led MQM, but with precise directives that these reports should remain completely impartial and credible.
However, problems began to crop up when Prime Minister Sharif was informed by the intelligence agencies that some provincial ministers allied to his Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI), President Ishaqís son-in-law Irfanullah Khan Marwat, several prominent Pirs of Sindh, then chief Minister of the province Jam Sadiq Ali and some key members of the PPP and the Altaf-led MQM were all involved in criminal activities. Subsequently, the leaderships of different political parties were informed of these intelligence reports and asked to purge their parties of such elements as early as possible. In response, the PPP high command publicly severed its links with Al-Zulfiqar while Altaf Hussain deemed it fit to expel Afaq Ahmed and Amir Khan from the MQM. However, Nawaz Sharif was advised by his close aides that so many politicians from Sindh have been named in the intelligence reports as criminals that if they were rounded up, the Jam Sadiq-led coalition government would simply collapse; the PPP would seize power in Sindh and the PML-led government in Islamabad would be plunged into a serious political crisis. Sharif was also warned that any action against criminal elements of the Altaf-led party by the Army could prove counter productive, despite the fact that intelligence reports had described the MQM as “a state within a state”. Nonetheless, General Asif Nawaz Janjua was determined to move ahead with his plan of an operation clean-up in Sindh to cleanse the province of criminals. By that time, the infamous kidnapping and torture of Major Kaleemuddin by MQM henchmen had already taken place. In May 1992, a month before the operation was officially launched, the original plan was reviewed by the GHQ and it was decided that a direct clash between the Army and the MQM should be avoided.
Therefore, the MQM-Haqiqi was launched. But the intelligence move backfired and severely damaged the credibility of the Army. During a high-level troika meeting hardly two weeks before the operation clean-up, General Asif told Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that although many MQM, PML, PPP and Pagaro League members were on the criminal list, the Armyís first and foremost target would be dacoits in interior Sindh. However, as soon as the operation was launched, Nawaz Sharif was taken by surprise as the Army opted to raid the Nine Zero headquarters of the MQM in Azizabad to arrest dozens of its activists and leaders who were wanted for their involvement in criminal and terrorist activities. By that time, while sensing the gravity of the situation, Altaf Hussain had already fled Karachi for London. As pressure mounted on Nawaz Sharif by the component parties of the IJI, he decided to give a clear cut message to the Army by travelling to London to meet Altaf Hussain on June 19, 1992 when the operation clean-up was at its peak in Karachi and Hyderabad. And his move explicitly meant to distance himself from the operation clean-up of the Pakistan Army that was being directed against one of his important coalition partners in Sindh — the Altaf-led MQM. REFERENCE: General Janjua — the man behind 1992 operation Friday, September 04, 2009 By Amir Mir http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=196562&Cat=2&dt=9%2F4%2F2009
Where many people term the appointment of General Pervez Musharraf as army chief in 1998 a big blunder by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif a top PML-N leader now claims that Musharraf was the best option available. ‘The prime minister made the final decision. I did support Musharraf to become the Chief of Army Staff… But the decision was based purely on merit given his professional track record,’ PML-N central leader Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, told DawnNews, in an interview. Critics blamed Chaudhry Nisar and his brother Lt Gen (r) Iftikhar Ali Khan, the then defence secretary, for persuading Nawaz Sharif to appoint General Musharraf as army chief. But Chaudhry Nisar, who is also the Opposition Leader in the National Assembly nowadays, did not have any regrets of favouring General Musharraf to the top slot. Asked whether the military coup of October 1999 was the result of that bad judgement, he observed they supported Musharraf to become the army chief not the Chief Martial Law Administrator.Chaudhry Nisar also justified the appointment of General Musharraf as Chairman Joint Chief of Staff Committee after the Kargil fiasco.He asserted the decision to appoint General Musharraf as chairman of the JCSC was made to boost the moral of the armed forces.He said the PML-N government did not want to act against the generals, who masterminded and executed Kargil operation. Not only General Pervez Musharraf himself, but many former close aides of Nawaz Sharif including Chaudhry Shujaat and Mushahid Hussain, already stated that Kargil operation was conducted with full consent of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.Chaudhry Nisar did not deny the ambition of attaining the top political office of the prime minister. ‘When you are in politics then you struggle. And whatever comes you take it. You take the good with bad. As and when situation arises you face it,’ he observed, when asked whether or not he wants to become the prime minister. He said whatever the case may be he would not make any categorical observation while sitting in a television interview. Reference: Sunday, April 26, 2009, 16:28 http://www.pakistanviews.com/politics/nisar-says-he-backed-musharraf-s-appointment.html
Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan in the Parliament 1
The Chief of Army Staff, General Asif Nawaz had begun to feel upset at many of Sharif's moves, most significant of them being his attempts to create rifts within the Army. Chaudhry Nisar Ahmad and Brig. Imtiaz, the former ISI chief, were even accused by the late General of threatening to turn him into another Gul Hasan, the army chief who was sacked by Z.A. Bhutto and bundled into a car by Ghulam Mustafa Khar and taken to Lahore by road. It is said that just when General Mirza Aslam Beg was about to topple Nawaz Sharif at the fag end of his tenure in 1991, President Ghulam Ishaq Khan agreed to name General Asif Nawaz as the new COAS, three months before he was to take over. Just when General Asif Nawaz was getting seriously worried about the Nawaz Sharif government, he died quite suddenly in January, 1993 Reference: Saga of intrigue and deceit by Shaheen Shebai - Dawn - 27.5.1993 / ISLAMIC PAKISTAN: ILLUSIONS & REALITY By Abdus Sattar Ghazali [Correction: Brigadier Imtiaz had never been ISI Chief rather he was IB Chief during Nawaz Sharif's First Government]
Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan in the Parliament 2
ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Muslim League-N has urged the army to clarify its position on the appeal made by MQM chief Altaf Hussain to ‘patriotic generals’ to take ‘martial law-like action against corrupt politicians’. “Ask ISPR (army’s public relations department) to make a comment on it. I personally believe that the army should present its viewpoint,” Chaudhry Nisar, Leader of Opposition in National Assembly, said in reply to a question at a press conference on Saturday. Chaudhry Nisar said it would be in the interest of the army if it stayed away from politics. “Please, let the army do its job. It is in the interest of the army, country and all institutions as Pakistan’s future lies in democracy. Today, when they (army) have returned to their original work, don’t distract them.” The opposition leader said the federal government’s silence, too, was surprising considering that the Muttahida chief was actually talking about the rulers’ corruption. The PML-N has already submitted a privilege motion to the National Assembly secretariat in condemnation of Mr Hussain’s remarks. Like the MQM, he added, the PML-N was concerned over corruption, but the party favoured accountability through parliament. Chaudhry Nisar accused the Muttahida chief of “trying to divide the army and make it controversial” at a time when soldiers were busy in the war against terrorism.
In the past, Chaudhry Nisar recalled, the MQM was always critical of Rangers and the army’s role and raised “anti-army slogans” when Gen Asif Nawaz, Gen Jehangir Karamat and Gen Waheed Kakar were army chiefs. “However, when Gen Musharraf hid their misdeeds, the army became dear to the MQM,” he said. The opposition leader criticised the MQM for keeping silent when “its favourite army chief (an allusion to Gen Musharraf) made those people minister who had been facing corruption charges and were under the custody of National Accountability Bureau which was under the total control of the army”. “Why did you not question Gen Musharraf when he released NAB-affected people from jails and made them your colleagues in the cabinet?” the PML-N leader asked. Commenting on Mr Hussain’s controversial remarks, the PML-N leader reminded the MQM leadership that it was the army that had ‘exposed its style of politics based on murder and extortion”. He threatened to present the record of army about the MQM in parliament if it did not stop personal attacks on the PML-N leadership. REFERENCE: PML-N seeks army, govt’s response to MQM remarks By Amir Wasim Sunday, 29 Aug, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/front-page/pmln-seeks-army,-govts-response-to-remarks-980
Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan in the Parliament 3 [Article 6 as explained by Mr Haider Abbas Rizvi in National Assembly. He explains that “abettors” are also guilty of Treason]
On Thursday, February 05, 2009; 2:44 AM….In the Urdu daily Jang of February 2, 2009 there was a column titled “Would Altaf Hussain participate in long march ?”, by the famous journalist Mr. Ansar Abbasi known for his research and investigative journalism. This column was a direct response to MQM’s Quaid Mr. Altaf Hussain’s address to MQM’s rabita committee in London on Jan 27, 2009. During the address Mr. Altaf Hussain put a simple question to Mr. Nawaz Shareef vis-à-vis PCO judges. that “what does the Charter of democracy’s article 3, clause (a) & (b) says about those judges who took oath under the PCO and if Mian sahib can answer this question then MQM too would diligently work with them towards the enforcement of Charter of Democracy.”. But in case Mian Nawaz fails to answer the question then it will be morally binding on him and an obligation to reconsider his decision to participate in long march. Principally & professionally speaking the answer should have come from Mian Nawaz Shareef. Alas it never came; nevertheless Mr. Ansar Abbasi took upon himself to issue a rejoinder. Peoples Party’s Shaheed Chairperson Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto and Mian Nawaz Shareef put their signatures on the Charter of Democracy (COD) comprising of 7 pages, 4 important topics and 36 articles in London on May, 14, 2006. But here we will only talk about the relevant points brought up by Mr. Ansar Abbasi, explained and deliberated upon in the aforementioned column. Mr. Abbasi says that COD’s article 3(a) explains the procedure for appointment of new judges and that Article 3(b) addresses the already appointed judges of higher courts with relevance to their oath taken under PCO.
Indeed this is true that Article 3 (b) addresses the oath taken by superior courts judges under the PCO and this is exactly said in the COD that “No judge shall take oath under PCO and nor shall he take any oath whose language stands at odds with the 1973 constitution’s defined language for oath of judges”.
Let’s read the exact text of the relevant Article from the COD. Under Article 3(a) it says “The recommendations for appointment of judges to superior judiciary shall be formulated through a commission, which shall comprise of the following: (i). The chairman shall be a chief justice, who has never previously taken oath under the PCO.”
Ansar Abbasi in his column translates it as “The recommendations for the appointment of judges for the superior courts shall be undertaken through a Commission. This commission will comprise of following individuals.
1) The Commission’s chairman shall be a Chief Justice, who has never previously taken oath under PCO”. Mr. Ansar Abbasi himself mentions that “according to this Article Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry (deposed) Chief Justice cannot become the chairman of this commission which has been entrusted with the task of making recommendations for the appointment of new judges. And for this any chief justice who in past did not take oath under PCO stands eligible to become chairman of this commission”. Our question to Mr. Ansar Abbasi when he openly admits that according to COD’s Article 3(a) Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry (deposed) CJ cannot become chairman of the commission that will make recommendations for the appointment of judges to superior courts and is not eligible for the task then how can he according to Article 3(a) be eligible to hold the highest and honorable office of the superior court? Knowing this reality in its totality and fully well would it be right and legal to demand his restoration?
A very amusing point that MR Ansar Abbasi brings forth with regards to Article 3(a) in his column; it says “this sub-article has nothing to do with the current judges and that few people according to a well thought of plan are interpreting Article 3(a) in such a way so as to make the restoration of Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry controversial and create confusion in common people”. But after explaining Article 3(a) he says “the authors of COD after much thought did not use the word “The Chief Justice” of Pakistan but used “a chief justice” since they knew that the chief justice of that time and those who will follow as chief justice will be those who took oath under the 2001 PCO”.
Quite strikingly Mr. Abbasi accepted the fact that in May 2006 this particular Article in the COD was specially included for the chief justice in office at that time and his brother justices who had taken oath under PCO so that Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry and other justices who took oath under General Pervez Musharraf’s PCO will stand disqualified for appointment as superior court judges. Moreover this is absolutely true that on May 14, 2006 when Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Shaheed and Mian Nawaz Shareef signed the COD, both the leaders had no clue and nor did the senior leadership of two parties knew anything or for that matter the leaders of lawyers movement had any idea that on march 9 a reference would be filed against Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry the sitting chief justice of Pakistan, that on November 3 General Musharraf would again impose emergency in the country and that judges would again be required by him to take new oaths under the PCO. As for making Mr. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry controversial, it is those parties who are dragging him into political rallies and processions that are to be blamed. As a justice Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry deserves the respect and protocol that comes with the office. Sadly & with due respect the chief justices and judges of superior courts are not only and strictly prohibited from public appearances, attending or endorsing political rallies and agendas, but even barred from attending private functions of such nature. But the honorable justice thought it right to go ahead with attending political rallies and processions and let the exalted office of chief justice go to the street and let himself become a spectacle on top of being controversial.
PML (N) leadership came up with the ludicrous argument that PCO’s mention in the COD is with reference to those judges who took oath on November 3, 2007. The question is that when the signatures were being put on charter of democracy on May 14, 2006 it was way before November 3, 2007, then whether PML (N) leadership got the premonition that on November 3, 2007 judges will take oath under the PCO? As per Ansar Abbasi if Article 3(a) of COD has no relevance with current judges or of any consequence to them then who are these particular PCO judges mentioned in the COD, since before January 2000 the PCO came in General Zia-ul-Haq’s martial law in 1977 and none of those PCO judges from General Zia’s time were present in the judiciary of 2007. Accordingly it proves that in the COD announced on May 14, 2006 the very mention of PCO refers to the PCO of General Musharraf introduced in January 2000 and those who took oath on it.
The fact is that in the COD the issue of judges taking oath under PCO has been dealt with utmost seriousness and in Article 3(a) clause (2) with reference to procedure for appointment of judges in superior courts that it clearly says commission that makes recommendations for the appointment of judges, its members shall be Provincial High Court Chief Justices who have never taken oath under PCO. In case the criteria are not met then it will be senior most judges who will be members of the commission and those who have never taken oath under PCO. If in January 2000 there had been no PCO by General Musharraf and Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and his brother justices not taken oath under the PCO and provided constitutional protection to General Musharraf’s dictatorship, then it is our firm belief that in COD the mention of judges who took oath under PCO and their appointment would not have been mentioned as an Article in order to disqualify them. But on the contrary this would not have been an issue at all.
Mian Nawaz Shareef, Qazi Husaain Ahmed, Imran Khan and their like minded political leaders, lawyers, Ansar Abbasi and others of same thought look down on the current Supreme Court Chief Justice Mr. Abdul Hameed Dogar and judges appointed under the PCO after the emergency of November 3, 2007 and don’t spare a moment in maligning them and consider them unconstitutional. Mian Nawaz Sharif has taken the extreme position of not recognizing them and has not hesitated in using derogatory and uncouth language such as “anti-state elements”, “traitors” and ”anti-Pakistan” and keeps using it in public. We have one question to all the above mentioned personalities and with all due respect we ask if Mr. Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar and other judges taking oath under PCO on November 3, 2007 in their eyes was a serious and punishable crime then Mr. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s oath on January 4, 2000 under General Musharraf’s first PCO too falls in the category of a serious and punishable crime. Then why do they present this one judge who committed the same unconstitutional act as a hero and the other as a traitor? Was General Musharraf’s PCO in 2000 was correct and in accordance with the constitution of Pakistan? If this is true then the Chief Justice of that time Mr. Saeed-uz-Zaman Siddiqui, Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid, Justice Wajeehuddin Ahmed, Justice Kamal Mansoor Alam, Justice Mamoon Kazi, and Justice Khalil-ur-Rahman would not have said no to taking oath under PCO and would not have said that we have already taken oath under the constitution of Pakistan and therefore we will not take a second oath under the PCO. These were the true heroes of judiciary those who demonstrated strength of character and were brave enough to not to take oath under PCO and instead submitted their resignations. This most important chapter in Pakistan’s legal history went unnoticed by Mian Nawaz Shareef and by the leadership of PML (N) who are always at the forefront of all kinds of foul and malicious attacks on Supreme Court. Rather they never came out on streets at that time, nor protested or bothered to become champions of judiciary. Nor did the lawyers who are ardently campaigning for restoration of deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and equate it with freedom of judiciary ever bothered to come out at that time and launch protests. Neither did Mr. Ansar Abbasi custodian of the pen and freedom of expression bothered to come out and lodge angry protests and columns. The sad irony is that lawyers and those political leaders who are at the forefront of long marches, waving angry fists and raging in fury never bothered to come out for Chief Justice of that time Mr. Saeed-uz-Zaman Siddiqui, Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid, Justice Wajeehuddin Ahmed, Justice Kamal Mansoor Alam, Justice Mamoon Kazi, and Justice Khalil-ur-Rahman. Not even a mild protest or statement from these lawyers was registered or launched in favor of these true heroes of judiciary. Why this dual approach and where was the civil society then? And what were the prominent members of ex-servicemen’s society doing at that time or were they hiding in some hole? Where was their sense of democracy at that time? Had Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry taken the honorable and brave step of siding with the judges who refused to take oath under General Musharraf’s PCO in 2000 then MQM too would have been at his side, as MQM’s demand and stand is principled, MQM questions as to why is only the restoration of the Nov 2 2007 judges being demanded & why not the judges who refused to take oath under PCO in 2000 and are true heroes who stood up like true men and should all be restored.
MQM strictly adheres to the principled stand that if Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s taking oath in 2000 under General Musharraf’s PCO is acceptable and correct according to Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like-minded then how is that judges who took oath on November 3, 2007 under General Musharraf’s second PCO could be illegal ? If one judge who took oath under one PCO is judiciary’s hero, protector and flag bearer of the constitution and considered champion of law then how is it so that another judge who took oath under second PCO can be declared as the villain of judiciary ? and one who abrogated constitution ? If the oath taken on November 3, 2007 by judges was wrong then how is that oath taken earlier in 2000 under the first PCO by General Musharraf by justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was legit and right in the eyes of law ? Asking to restore judges appointed under the first PCO and taking out long marches in their support and when it comes to judges who took oath under second PCO showing utter and abject disregard , calling them as unconstitutional and demanding for them to be removed is nothing short of blatant dichotomy in the character and logic of those who are espousing Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s restoration. If the PCO of January 2000 was right and legit then how that is the PCO of November 3 2007 was wrong and illegal? If the second PCO was wrong and illegal then how can the first PCO be declared as right and legit?
Ansar Abbasi and his like minded political and religious leadership, members of legal community curse and accuse General Musharraf for breaking the constitution, twice introducing PCO, keeping both President & Army Chief offices, fighting elections in uniform and distorting the constitution of the country. Alongside they also demand the restoration of the judiciary of November 2, 2007. Basically they want the restoration of the judiciary whose Chief Justice was Iftikhar Chaudhry. For those with short memories let me remind them with great respect that General Musharraf’s takeover on October 12 1999 and his non-democratic step and his chief executive’s position was validated under doctrine of necessity by whom? In 2000 General Musharraf was allowed to postpone elections for two years by whom? Again in 2002 and in 2005 General Musharraf had both the offices of Chief of Army Staff as well as President and a constitutional writ that was filed against it in Supreme Court was rejected by whom?
Yet again on September 28th 2007 who gave permission to General Musharraf to fight elections in uniform? Was it the Dogar Judiciary as cynically put by Nawaz Shareef or was it the judiciary of November 2, 2007 that rejected the constitutional writs against General Musharraf regarding his Chief of Army Staff uniform, these writs according to Article 184(3) were declared as non maintainable and rejected by whom?
If Mr. Ansar Abbasi and his like minded friends and cronies call General Musharraf a dictator and usurper then who gave sanctuary and constitutional protection to this dictator’s extra-constitutional steps?
In due consideration and full acknowledgement of these facts and in light of this evidence Mr. Ansar Abbasi should sincerely ponder and seriously reflect as to whom is the true violator of the Charter of Democracy? Whether it is MQM or was it Nawaz Shareef and his political allies and confidantes who in demanding the restoration of PCO judges are standing accused of violating their own charter of democracy? If Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like minded political friends think and view the COD as that sacrosanct document that if its is not practiced then the entire judiciary, parliamentary system and democracy can be declared as non constitutional and can lead to the turning of tables on democracy and its lynching then principled approach and scruples tell us that if one has faith in COD then one should not talk of restoration of an individual who took oath under a dictator’s PCO, someone who provided full protection to the dictators extra constitutional transgressions. And if one only wants to talk out loud on the COD and not to practice it in spirit , then those who talk out the loudest on the COD should instead of long march go to the Constitution Avenue in Islamabad and burn this COD in the presence of public and in their court and to stop fooling people and pray for their forgiveness.
Would Mr. Ansar Abbasi exhibit moral courage to seek nation’s forgiveness for supporting Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry a person who took oath under General Musharraf’s PCO, a person who provided constitutional protection on many occasions to General Musharraf’s extra-constitutional steps? MQM’s leader Mr. Altaf Hussain sacrificed his party’s interest in lieu of the sensitive national security situation, the perils that democracy is facing today and for its survival in Pakistan. But is that what Mr. Ansar Abbasi would like to see that we put the entire country at stake for one person’s ego arrogance and his employment? Would MR Ansar Abbasi like to sacrifice the entire country, throw democracy in tailspin and put it to the torment of long marches, shutter-down strikes, chaos and lawlessness in these perilous times? Is MR Ansar Abbasi ready to back a long march and sit-downs that aims to destabilize the elected parliaments and to rock democracy’s boat and only to lead to have it trampled under some new dictator’s boots? Mr. Ansar Abbasi and his confidantes and like minded friends will for the sake of democracy have to select between an individual and our country’s democratic system. Is Mr. Abbasi he ready to do it? REFERENCE: A Riposte to Ansar Abbasi By Mustafa Azizabadi Member – Central Rabita Committee & In charge Central Media cell. MQM http://www.mqm.org/English-News/feb-2009/azizabadi-article07-02-09.htm
Speech of Haider Abbas Rizvi (MQM) Rebuttal to Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan in the Parliament 4
Opposition leader in the National Assembly Chaudhry Nisar said that former President Pervez Musharraf covered up the misdeeds of MQM’s Chief Altaf Hussain. While addressing a press conference in Islamabad, Ch. Nisar alleged that MQM’s 25 year politics revolves around intelligence agencies. Chaudhry Nisar criticized Altaf Hussain and said that a British passport holder should not give lessons of sympathy for Pakistan. He said that whatever happens in Pakistan and how grim the situation remains, Altaf does not leave his million pounds home in London. He asked that why did Altaf Hussain not oppose General Musharraf during his military rule? Musharraf was his favourite ruler. REFERENCE: Why didn’t Altaf oppose Musharraf?’ asks Ch. Nisar ISLAMABAD - 28th August 2010 By Umair Anwar http://www.aaj.tv/2010/08/why-didnt-altaf-oppose-musharraf-questions-ch-nisar/
Addressing a press conference here on Monday, Chaudhry Nisar whose party was in the forefront of the movement for restoration of deposed judges, including Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, also challenged the judiciary to take cognisance of the statement of MQM chief Altaf Hussain urging army generals to take “martial law-like action” against corrupt politicians. “You always remain in search of issues to take suo motu notices. Now take action because a person has openly talked about abrogation of the Constitution in broad daylight,” the PML-N leader said, seemingly unhappy with the judiciary for some reasons as he did not explain under which law the judiciary could initiate such an action merely on the basis of a statement. He announced that his party had decided to move a privilege motion on the issue and termed the MQM chief’s statement “part of a well-designed and well-orchestrated strategy”. Nisar blames judiciary for fake degree chaos By Amir Wasim Tuesday, 24 Aug, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/national/nisar-blames-judiciary-for-fake-degree-chaos-480
REFERENCE: http://www.express.com.pk/epaper/PoPupwindow.aspx?newsID=1101006456&Issue=NP_LHE&Date=20100723 Thursday, July 22, 2010, Shaban 09, 1431 A.H http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/jul2010-daily/22-07-2010/u39505.htm
DG IB IQBAL NIAZI 1
DG IB IQBAL NIAZI 2
DG IB IQBAL NIAZI 3
DG IB IQBAL NIAZI 4
DG IB IQBAL NIAZI 5
“Meesaq-e-Pakistan” OK but with whom because Jamat-e-Islami had declared “Nawaz Sharif a Security Risk” before 12 Oct 1999 AND later the same Jamat-e-Islami linked Nawaz Sharif with “alleged Islamic Militants” : Videos – Munawar Hassan, Jamat-e-Islami, Nawaz Sharif and US Agenda http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/04/munawar-hassan-jamat-e-islami-nawaz.html
ISLAMABAD, March 18: Jamaat-i-Islami chief Qazi Hussain Ahmed has revealed that Osama bin Laden had offered to buy loyalties of legislators to see Mian Nawaz Sharif as prime minister. In an interview appearing in the magazine of an Urdu newspaper on Sunday, Qazi Hussain Ahmed said that Osama had visited the JI headquarters Mansoora and wanted to strike an agreement with the Jamaat but the suggestion was declined by him. Excerpts of the interview were published by the newspaper on Saturday. Qazi said he had met Osama several times in the past.However, the JI on Saturday clarified that meetings between the JI amir and Osama in Peshawar and Lahore were held in days when the Al Qaeda leader was staying in Peshawar. Recalling political events that took place when Mr Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League and JI were components of the then Islami Jamhoori Ittehad, Qazi said Osama was a big supporter of IJI and Nawaz Sharif and wanted to see him Pakistan’s prime minister.
Nawaz Sharif Osama Bin Laden Khalid Khwaja Connections 1
Nawaz Sharif Osama Bin Laden Khalid Khwaja Connections 2
Nawaz Sharif Osama Bin Laden Khalid Khwaja Connections 3
“Bin Laden was prepared to pay for buying parliamentarians’ votes to achieve this objective,” said Qazi Hussain Ahmed, who also heads the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal. He said a delegation sent by Osama had visited him in Peshawar and conveyed that they wanted cooperation from JI but “we declined the request”. In a statement issued on Saturday, a JI spokesman said that excerpts from interview were published in the daily and presented on a private TV channel in such a manner that they were creating confusion in the minds of people.— PPI. REFERENCE: Osama offered to buy votes for Nawaz: Qazi March 19, 2006 Sunday Safar 18, 1427 http://www.dawn.com/2006/03/19/top10.htm
I read this headline on, THE NEWS website, Tension between Zardari, Shahbaz mounts over jailed chief editor of The Frontier Post''. This makes no sense that Rehmat Shah Afridi is still in prison, I was expecting from ANP Govt in pukhtoonistan to react on this issue but I don't understand muteness of ANP leadership, although on ANP web site I did send a message to Chief Minister, I would like to ask all the writers on this forum to send messages to CM on the following website of ANP(http://www.awaminationalparty.org/news/)and express your solidarity with The Frontier Post Chief Mr. Afridi who is in prison because he was punished for expressing his views and he was educating Pakhtuns through his newspaper. His confinement is politically motivated. The drugs were planted on vehicle he was in. Similar to innumerable judicial murders and crimes to suffocate voice of Pathans. The literate class of people in Pakistan is the only hope, which can place a check & balance on these bureaucrats corrupt politicians. Its about time this class should pick their pens. Its really amazing that criminals and thugs involved in suicide attacks can be easily released in Pakistan but someone like Mr. Afridi stays in prison. Two face Nawaz Sharif and his brother who are responsible for declaring Pakistan a failed state ran out of country but did not have courage and principles to face jail, attacked Supreme Court and insulted judges but now wants to be champions of judiciary and free press.
Rehmat Shah Afridi [Frontier Posts] Exposes Nawaz Sharif (PML-N)'s Corruption 1
Rehmat Shah Afridi [Frontier Posts] Exposes Nawaz Sharif (PML-N)'s Corruption 2
I agree with Mr. Asif Ali Zardari who bitterly asked: "Where are the champions of the press freedom today? Rehmat Shah Afridi was arrested and booked in a fake drug smuggling case on political grounds. He spent nine years in jail just for writing the truth and now he is seriously ill but some people still want to take their revenge. "Champions of the press freedom should be ashamed of themselves that for nine years some one in their ranks is in prison but they are not saying a word. Rehmat Shah Afridi was punished because he disclosed that Nawaz Sharif received Rs. 150 crore from Osama bin Ladin in the Green Palace Hotel, Madina, with the pledge that the amount would be used for furthering the cause of Jihad in Afghanistan and helping the Mujahideen and exposing the deeds of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif. Instead he (Nawaz) put the whole amount in his pocket. Nawaz Sharif got annoyed with Afridi when he was chief minister of Punjab in 1986.Frontier Post Chief disclosed in his newspaper that Nawaze sold the commercial land between UCH and Kalma Chowk in Lahore to his relatives for meager Rs. 400 per marla.
Rehmat Shah Afridi [Frontier Posts] Exposes Nawaz Sharif (PML-N)'s Corruption 3
Rehmat Shah Afridi [Frontier Posts] Exposes Nawaz Sharif (PML-N)'s Corruption 4
After that, he distributed plots in NWFP, Punjab and Balochistan among his colleagues and opponents to get their political support. He published all this in his newspaper along with proofs, which further infuriated Nawaz Sharif. Rehmat Shah Afridi used his personal links to thwart the "no-confidence motion" against Benazir Bhutto in 1990 and asked the members of National Assembly from Punjab, FATA and NWFP to use their vote in favour of Benazir Bhutto. Mr. Afridi did so as it was in the interest of the country at that time. Nawaz Sharif once threatened him that they would rule the country for 20 years and that he (Rehmat Shah) could not harm him through publishing news items against them. This proves all cases against The Frontier Post chief were false and baseless. Detention of Rehmat Shah Afridi is no more justified. Rehmat Shah Afridi had been arrested in a fake and bogus case because the then government was not happy with his bold editorial policy. The PPP government's pro-media and democratic credentials have already been enhanced by the proposed anti-PEMRA bill in parliament. It should now do the honourable and just thing by ordering the immediate release of Rehmat Shah Afridi and winning hearts and minds all round. REFERENCE: Prisoner of conscience M Waqar New York Thursday, May 22, 2008, Jamad-i-Awal 14, 1429 A.H. http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=le&nid=360&ad=22-05-2008 ASLO READ: REFERENCE: Rehmat Shah Afridi’s case unique in country’s legal history By Abid Butt Friday, June 04, 2004 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_4-6-2004_pg7_48