Comedy of Musharraf's Police Ordinance - 1

Part 1

A very dear friend of mine [he wants anonymity] has forwarded a draft lambasting the so-called Police Reforms thrusted down the throats of Pakistanis by General Musharraf, General Tanveer Naqvi and their cohorts.

"QUOTE"

THE POLICE ORDINANCE A CRITICAL ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION:

Drafting a piece of law may appear to be a simple phenomenon. Proposing one may prove be an affair still simpler. But developing the concept of a piece of law that is coherent with the social reality, national experience & the framework of other prevalent legal dogma is not a simple or easy affair at all. The draft ordinance at hand, The Police Ordinance 2002, has probably been conceived & drafted considering it to be a simple & easygoing affair, and that is precisely why the Draft Ordinance in its entirety seems to be out of time and a bit out of focus. The assumptions & inferences whereupon the provisions of the ordinance rest are out of tune and out of the general policy & legal framework envisioned by the present government. The ordinance is distorted unto itself insofar as there is a lot of inherent contradictions between the "objectives" it proudly boasts of and the actual "realities" that it seeks to create. At many a places, it appears even to a plain reader, that the foremost objective in the minds of the drafters of the Ordinance was the promotion of the police department, and not the legal integrity of document or wider public interest. As a result of this enthusiasm, at some places wide gaps have been found to exist between the objectives and provisions of the Ordinance. On the whole the document visibly seems to be engineered to meet particular objectives and hence a piece of `motivated legislation'. Were the document designed and drafted by legal experts, ex-judges of superior courts & professionals, these distortions could have been avoided. In this backdrop, the most significant touchstone that is be used to study the impact of this Ordinance on the working, efficiency, ffectiveness, behavior, attitude, outlook & output of police force is this contradiction between the `heavenly objectives' and `worldly motives' hidden therein.

THE DISCOURSE:

This part of this paper seeks to analyze the Police Ordinance on the touchstones of logic, rationality, legal principles, concepts of jurisprudence, our Pakistani social experience & reality, the faûze of current police force and above all the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Special reference requires to be made to the objectives of this Ordinance that have been highlighted in the Preamble. Similarly, the public aspirations relating to the very concept of "Police Reforms" have to be considered, and it has to be inquired as to whether the Ordinance conforms thereto or not. The analysis is made in the form of questions that have been answered in detail on the basis of analysis of the provisions contained in the Draft Ordinance. These answers would themselves point towards the changes & amendments that this paper seeks to get incorporated into the Draft Ordinance.

The questions that have been designed for the sake of analysis and put to the Ordinance are enumerated as follows:

1. Whether or not the police force created by this Ordinance shall come up to the self-proclaimed objective of functioning according to requirements of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973?

2. Whether or not the police force created by this Ordinance shall come up to the self-proclaimed objective of Firstly, satisfying democratic aspirations of people of Pakistan, Secondly, being people friendly, Thirdly, restoration of public confidence in police force, AND lastly, coming up to the peoples' expectations regarding the exercise of police reforms?

3. Whether or not the newly constituted police force shall be able to be professionally more competent, as has been vehemently promised by the new legislation? And similarly, whether or not the new ordinance provides any mechanisms or safeguards to improve the training & personnel quality of the police force?

4. Whether or not the Police-2001-Edition shall be able to behave in a non-authoritarian manner or act non-politically, as has been proudly outlined by the Preamble to the Ordinance?

5. Whether or not the Ordinance is in accordance with the concept of "Devolution of Authority & Responsibility" as envisaged by the BNPS Local Govt. Ordinance 2001 and Chief Executive's seven point agenda? Similarly, whether or not this draft ordinance conforms to the principle of "Decentralization of Power & Executive Authority" that underlies the Seven-point agenda or Local Govt. Ordinance?

6. Whether or not the newly proposed system offers elaborate & effective mechanism of civilian control of police?

7. And last but not least, whether or not the newly erected police forces would be having more authority & be more power-wielding than that of today's police forces?

8. Whether or not the Provincial Government would be able to perform its constitutional obligations, after the Police Ordinance 2001 is put to force?

QUESTION NO. 1

Whether or not the police force created by this Ordinance shall come up to the self-proclaimed objective of functioning according to requirements of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973? Following points need to appreciated before this question is responded to in definite terms:

a. The question of law & order along with the constitution of police forces has been traditionally, customarily and constitutionally dealt with by the Provincial Governments. The Police Act has been a provincial law. The enactment, implementation & enforcement thereof have been a responsibility of Provincial governments in the legal & constitutional history of Pakistan. Would it not amount to a de facto intrusion into the Provincial Autonomy granted & guaranteed by the Constitution of 1973, if the Federal Government enacts the Ordinance and imposes it throughout the country. The question needs to be dealt with great caution & attention, as the issues involved are extremely sensitive & provocative historically & politically.

b. The status of a Presidential Ordinance, having a limited time frame and being promulgated to meet a contingency as opposed to an act of legislature that had been duly enacted & promulgated needs to be investigated carefully. This care & caution is recommended so as to ensure the vital input from the public representatives. Such input from public representatives at the Provincial level is going to be all the more critical and important for many reasons. The Police Ordinance is going to affect each and every aspect of normal public life, and hence the heightened interest of the Provincial Governments in the working & operation of the police department. Moreover, in view of the fact that Provinces' political machinery is nearly dead at the moment, caution becomes all the more important. In future, when this machinery is again fired into motion, many complications, functional snags & legal hassles may arise. All these aspects have to be considered before taking any concrete step in this behalf.

c. The Constitutional stipulation of separation of executive from the judiciary has been totally ignored and rather is violated by the proposed Ordinance. Reference has to be made in this context to the powers of the Police to regulate public. All of these powers prima facie appear to be administrative-cum-judicial powers. But, it must be appreciated that the exercise of all of these regulatory & individuals'-rights-determining powers is essentially judicial in color. On the basis of the commonplace observation regarding current misuse of lawful powers at the hands of police at institutional or individual level, it is not difficult at all to extrapolate and to envision the fate of public when these massive regulatory powers are vested in the local police! It is moreover quite difficult to conceive that only one authority is responsible for the determination & definition of an offense, for arresting the offenders thereof, for prosecuting the offenses, collecting the fines and then appropriating them for its own use at its own discretion. So many principles of constitution and jurisprudence are violated in this concept that it is difficult to summarize them in a few lines. One should not judge his own cause, the Common Law stipulates. On the other hand, as is proposed, the local police officer is being given the authority to not only to judge (i.e. to prosecute or not to prosecute OR to arrest or not to arrest), but also is being granted the power to define his causes. Similarly, the involvement of Chief Justices of Pakistan & of the respective High Court and Sessions Judges for the selection of Federal, Provincial & District Public Safety Commissions respectively is inherently unwarranted. This involvement of these supreme judicial offices in the selection of a person who is later expected to perform executive functions is misleading. The conceptual basis of this provision of the Ordinance negates the very roots of the separation of judiciary from the executive.

d. The Police Ordinance 2002 fails the "Test of Repugnancy", as provided in the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. This contention is based on the assumption that the enforcement of this Ordinance shall prevent the Provincial Government from the fulfillment of their constitutional obligation of maintenance of law & order. The Ordinance is bound to create serious imbalances in the balance of authority & resultant responsibility between the Provincial Government, the District Government & the Police department itself. On one hand, the powers of recruitment, appointment, postings, transfers, disciplinary actions, even development of allied rules & procedures and financial control are proposed to be taken away from the Provincial Government. On the other hand, though ironically, all of these powers are being vested in the Police Department itself. It must be accepted though, that a figurehead control is being granted to the respective Public Safety Commissions & the District Governments. But at the same time, it must be conceded that this control is toothless, powerless, motionless & sterile. Hence, it may be suggested in view of this genuinely-feared-logical-upshot of the Ordinance, that the constitutional responsibility of maintenance of law & order and administration of criminal justice, vide a constitutional amendment, be either ? Handed over to the Police department, as an organ of state; or ? Handed over to Public Safety Commissions, as a constitutionally erected body; or ? Handed over to the District Government; as a third tier of Government; or ? Shifted to Federal List from the Concurrent List. Adoption of at least one of these extreme measures is necessary to avoid the fatal failure from the test of repugnancy, that this Ordinance is bound to face in its current version. The purpose of these suggestions is obviously not to widen the scope of this discussion into the realm of the Constitution. Rather this suggestive form of argument is meant only to point towards a fatal legal & constitutional lacuna in the Ordinance, and to show that the Provincial government needs to be empowered & face-lifted vis-?is the Ordinance.

e. Many general principles of law & jurisprudence upheld by the Constitution have been mutilated by the Ordinance. Most significant of these include, ? Violation of fundamental rights of an individual, that have been granted by the Constitution & various Superior Courts rulings ? , Basic constitutional principles related to the procedures of Audit & Accounting have been ignored. Resultantly, the integrity of financial procedures & probity thereof is feared to be severely severed. ? The principle embodied by section 176 of the Police Ordinance 2002 is against the Code of Criminal Procedure, and at the same time undermines the spirit of Constitution. Usually, prosecution of certain offenses under various acts of legislature is declared to be a pre-requisite for subsequent cognizance by courts. But, the underlying principle is invariably the `nature of the offense', rather than being the `status of the offender'. This provision of the Ordinance just seems strange & bizarre. This grant of immunity to the police officers is unwarranted and does not seem to be based on any logical argument. f. Last but not least, the Police Ordinance 2002 seemingly confers upon the police department a status that is uncalled for, unjustified, unprecedented, extra-constitutional & unfounded. The opening sentences of the preamble arrogantly create an impression whereby it seems that the Police force is an instrument that has been imported from somewhere else for its use in Pakistan, and that an ordinance is required for the use of this instrument in order to meet the requirements of the Constitution & aspirations of the people. It seems that the police itself is not part of people or requirement of Constitution, and is rather being asked to cater for these requirements only for the benefit of the Constitution & people of Pakistan themselves. From the preamble, it appears that police requires the Constitution and the public so that it may police around! It is apparent that on the one hand, the Police Department is seeking the near-autonomous status like that of Pakistan Army, and on the other hand is trying to get rid of all controls whatsoever in the garb of `de-politicization'. It is not difficult to visualize & to understand the future working of the police force of 21st Century (as created by the Police Ordinance 2002). The police department would not be functionally subordinate to either of the Federal or Provincial or District government. There would be no financial or judicial control available over police. The supervisory bodies (like Public Safety Commissions, Police Complaint Authority or Directorate of Inspections) would only be toothless bodies that would only be by far recommending, suggesting, advising, making policies, guidelines etc. This picture, it must be emphasized, is in respect of the relationship of Government with the police. The public-police interface is yet to be analyzed.



QUESTION NO. 2:

Whether or not the police force created by this Ordinance shall come up to the self-proclaimed objectives of Firstly, satisfying democratic aspirations of people of Pakistan, Secondly, being people friendly, Thirdly, restoration of public confidence in police force, AND lastly, coming up to the peoples' expectations regarding the exercise of police reforms? A right away cover-to-cover perusal of the Police Ordinance 2002 would induce the reader to answer this not-too-complicated question in a big NO. Logically, this negative response can be reached at through examining certain aspects of the question. For instance, it needs to be investigated as to what are the grievances of public with respect to the existing police. On the basis of these public grievances, it is simple to deduce the public aspirations & expectations from the new Ordinance Once these aspirations have been discovered and self-proclaimed objectives of the Ordinance have been perused, it is not difficult to test the Ordinance against the aspirations of people on one hand and objectives of the Ordinance on the other. The grievances of a common man against the police force he comes across on every nook & corners are no secret at all. A simple list can be made out as follows;

i. Frequent disregard of individual human rights

ii. Incidence of arbitrary arrests

iii. False implication of innocent persons into criminal cases

iv. Fabrication of criminal cases against innocent persons

v. High incidence of illegal detention & informal approval thereof by the superior officers

vi. Physical & mental torture, manhandling, disrespectful attitude

vii. Extortion of money, corruption, bribery

viii. Refusal to register an FIR

ix. False & motivated FIRs

x. Excessive & uncalled for use of power & force

xi. Custodial & extra-judicial killings

xii. Patronage of organized crime, like gambling houses, sale of liquor, gun-running, drug-trafficking, prostitution etc

xiii. Defective & delayed investigation

xiv. Attitude & behavioral problems

xv. Non-prosecution of cases As has been described earlier, it is quite easy to deduce public aspirations & expectations from this extensive list. Naturally, after the police reforms have been affected, the people of Pakistan would expect the police to be;

1- More people friendly

2- Honest, dedicated & dutiful

3- Nice in outlook and disposition

4- Professionally competent

5- Effective & efficient

6- Not demanding in terms of public subservience & money

7- Not arrogant & trigger-happy

8- Prosecuting cases rather than killing whimsically

9- More humane, urbane & less profane

It may be highlighted at this stage of argument that the Police department has always ironically used their `failure to deliver' to plead their case for more resources and more authority. It is interesting to notice however, that more resources are being demanded without efficient use of available ones, and more authority is being requisitioned while misusing & abusing the existing one. Matter would have been quite understandable, were the demands related only to resources and not authority. The emphasis of Police Ordinance 2001 on grant or acquisition of more & more power & authority into the hands of the Police department is neither comprehensible nor maintainable. It is genuinely feared that the Police may get through with this agenda of `empowerment' & `centralization', as has been the case in the past. The Police department has successfully compelled various governments to adopt measures that could `cover' its functional failures. Examples are not too far to be identified. The establishments of The Speedy Trial Courts, The Military Courts or The Anti-Terrorism Courts are all visible & palpable proof of failure of police to deliver in prescribed manner. In addition to this, allegedly the police had had got their agendas & `lists of criminals' approved from various governments for extra-judicial killings in the past. This Ordinance is once again, it is feared, an attempt to get empowered, regimented & more centralized on the part of Police Department. These themes are obviously antagonist to the concept of `Devolution of Power & Responsibility' and are in contrast with the very concept of reformation of police. Keeping in a single view, the public aspirations, the past tendencies of Police as a department & its `motives' reflected by the Ordinance at hand, it becomes clear that the motives underlying the proposed Ordinance are quite worldly.


The police department is again trying to invoke sympathies at the national scale, on account of its past failures. What the police department is promising the people of Pakistan in return to all that empowerment, strengthening & fortification is a number of cosmetic provisions relating to certain commissions, authorities etc. that could only recommend, advise, suggest or what not. It is na? to believe that if a certain authority misused one unit power, the grant of another unit power would lessen the abuse thereof. Rather, the amount of power & its abuse grow in direct proportions, as history and the plain science of logic instruct us. No safeguard has been provided in 100 pages of proposed Police Ordinance, whereby one can satisfy oneself that a policeman would act & behave according to the "democratic aspirations" or "public expectations". Reference has only been made to these traits, while the Ordinance prescribes some `service-oriented-duties' of a police officer. The only safeguard that seems to have been provided is the word `shall' used by the framers of the Ordinance But if only words would have sufficed, the long list of public grievances that has been already presented, would not have been that long. Vide section176 of the Ordinance the framers of the draft Ordinance have even snatched the meaning of otherwise meaningful words, by stipulating that a police officer would not be called into question in a court of law, unless this has been precisely `permitted' by another police officer.


A discussion on this subject has already been presented in paper. In the nutshell, this provision has literally placed a police officer quite high `above the law'. Even the colonial Police Act of 1861 did not permit this safeguard to the police officers. This discussion implies that while the policeman & the police department have been made more powerful & more intrusive, no assurance as to their attitude towards general public has been guaranteed by the Police Ordinance 2002 in terms of strict police discipline, vivid judicial proceedings, summary trials, departmental actions, disciplinary procedures, public hearings, accountability, punishments etc. As has already been contended, section 81 of the Police Ordinance 2002 is not sufficient at all to ensure a healthy, vibrant & friendly public-police interface. Once it has been established that the only possible response to all ingredients of question no. 2 is supposed to be in the negative, it is not difficult to observe as to why this would happen. Some reasons that are inherent in the Ordinance itself are enumerated here, where their discussion is presented elsewhere in the paper.

A. Over-centralization of power & authority in the ranks of police

B. Absence of any civilian control

C. Lack of accountability

D. Toothless supervising bodies

QUESTION No. 3

Whether or not the newly constituted police force shall be able to be professionally more competent, as has been vehemently promised by the new legislation? And similarly, whether or not the new ordinance provides any mechanisms or safeguards to improve the training & personnel quality of the police force? On the strategic issue of enhancement of professional standards as well, the Ordinance provides the reader with certain pledges & assertions. Some critical questions have been left unanswered;

a. What precise changes shall be brought in recruitment procedures & training mechanisms, so as to ensure the quality improvement in the output?

b. What instruments will be used & applied so as to ensure optimal utilization of available resources?

c. Despite creating many specialized departments within the police force, the Ordinance does not provide any branch or section that may plan the financial aspect of the policing exercise. Why is it that despite providing for financial autonomy for certain police districts and emphasizing time & again the need for professional expertise in various branches of police, the Ordinance is absolutely silent on professionalism in financial management? It is quite strange that on one hand the Ordinance rightfully assumes that specialized training is required for every police officer to be an effective `investigator' for example, but on the other hand it assumes that a highly professional senior police officer would inherently be an expert in financial matters, management, expenditure, accounting, budgeting & planning.

d. The Ordinance does not stipulate any concrete measure for the improvement of the training institutions, other than providing for the posting of some very senior police officers as the heads of these institutions.

e. In case of a contention that the Ordinance itself is not supposed to cater for these minutiae, it must be inquired into as to why the development of a professional police force has been specifically charted out in the Preamble? Conversely, a piece of legislation is supposed to be in conformity with its preamble and to provide the means & modes of actual realization of its objectives.

f. Every improvement in the police force, be it qualitative or otherwise, is subjected to provision of resources. The argument itself is flawed. Would there be no improvement, if no additional resources were provided? Is there no scope of improvement in the quality of police personnel & of department itself remaining within the existing resources? Is the lack of resources, the only reason for all the ills that have marred the police performance in the past? And above all, is it required at all to state precisely in the Ordinance that additional resources are required for improvement? All of these questions are extremely important in the sense that they not only relate directly to the question of professional improvement, but also point towards the in-the-making-attitude of the police department towards the Government.

g. The Ordinance does not provide any check on the utilization of resources other than an internal audit of the department, and that of a certificate issued by a director of inspection. Does this mechanism suffice the intricate requirements of modern financial system, management, policy formulation & planning? It must also be appreciated that the Director of Inspection is again proposed to be a `senior police officer', and not a financial analyst or manager or an auditor. Can these mechanisms ensure that the available resources are used and professional competence has increased.

h. The Ordinance is dumb insofar as the provision of statistical tools for quantification of performance of police personnel is concerned. It does not even suggest a legal basis or framework for their subsequent development. This writer believes that such tools need to be developed so as to identify the performance indices and to evaluate the comparative performance data. These mechanisms are required for singling out the personnel on the basis of performance and efficiency. On the basis of this whole range of argument, one can deduce a simple but drastic question; what is that so special in this Ordinance that may ensure quality improvement in police personnel, that this Ordinance is called for in the first stead? What does it provide over & above what is currently available? It must be appreciated that answers to these questions are very critical in order to understand, to comprehend & to implement this piece of law. As the Ordinance itself does not provide answers to any of these questions, hence these have just been left unanswered! Forgive me but for the sake of Human Life i have to paste this article in parts, forgive me again.

Un-Islamic Extra-Judicial Killings.

It is entirely a different debate whether MQM {Ethnic Party of Southern Province Sindh, Pakistan and partenr of Musharraf Military Govt}is Fascist party, Terrorist Party, Extortionist group, simply a mob to be precise Mafia, and any other bad name you want to give the group. It is also a different debate that MQM is a back stabber {back stabbed PPP in 1989}.

The MQM leadership is least bothered that it is their own voters who are suffering due to their petty politics, the MQM is doing the same what the Jamat-e-Islami did right from 1947 to 1986 and it cost JI much. On Oct 31 2004 Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz assured families of the 28 missing supporters of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement that his government would make every possible effort to locate the missing people. The prime minister expressed his serious concern over the situation and noted that these people could not be located for a decade together. "I realize that the absence of a family member, especially a male one, creates a great vacuum in the family. It is really agonising when a loved one goes missing and the family fails to get any information about the person's whereabouts," he said. "The history cannot be changed," he remarked, and added that the government, however, would certainly make efforts to locate the missing people. They complained that for the past eight years, they had been appealing to different quarters for help in locating them, but to no avail. They complained that no action had been taken again the police officials involved in the affair although eyewitnesses were there. Instead of punishment, such officials got promotions, they regretted. They recalled that in 1997, due to the efforts of the then army chief Gen Jehangir Karamat, lives of four other arrested people had been saved. However, they added, the matter had been pushed into dormant alleys. The adjutant general of the army had termed it 'a sensitive matter'.

Maj Gen (R) Naseerullah Khan Babar with Dr. Shahid Masood - 1 (GEO TV 13 Apr 2008)


URL: http://youtu.be/fjgpheOlUxE

Maj Gen (R) Naseerullah Khan Babar with Dr. Shahid Masood - 2 (GEO TV 13 Apr 2008)


URL: http://youtu.be/Hr02DAdSZSw

Maj Gen (R) Naseerullah Khan Babar with Dr. Shahid Masood - 3 (GEO TV 13 Apr 2008)


URL: http://youtu.be/3WbcTOeQ_i8


The words and contents of Police Press releases and Govt. News agencies were taken as a cardinal truth particularly in the case of Extra judicial Encounters rather fake encounters in respect of MQM activists, the authorities after annihilating any such political activist used to declare them Hardcore Terrorist. Nobody asked any questions about the claims regarding MQM activists {some of them carried head money like nowadays suspects of Jihadi Activists} . It is very simple if somebody is a terrorists then he or she may be produced in the court of law to be prosecuted properly and his or her cases be analyzed threadbare as to how they are Terrorists? Declaring somebody Terrorist is no nonsense issue, it's really a serious matter.

Let see how these Extra judicial Killing, Camera Trial, Summary Military Courts, Habeas Corpus media Trials, Unlawful Entry, False Witnesses for desired conviction from courts and other such repressive measures are Anti-Justice even if the accused are worst offenders:

ALL OF THOSE MEASURES WHICH ABSOLVE AUTHORITY FROM ANY RESPONSIBILITY NEGATES QURAN:

a- O ye who believe! Be ye staunch in justice, witnesses for Allah, even though it be against yourselves or (your) parents or (your) kindred, whether (the case be of) a rich man or a poor man, for Allah is nearer unto both (than ye are). So follow not passion lest ye lapse (from truth) and if ye lapse or fall away, then lo! Allah is ever Informed of what ye do {Women-IV (Soorah Al-Nisa) Verse 135}.

b- O my people! Give full measure and full weight in justice, and wrong not people in respect of their goods. And do not evil in the earth, causing corruption. {Hud-XI (Soorah Hud) Verse 85}.

CAMERA TRIALS NEGATES QURAN:

a- Lo! Cospiracy is only of the devil, that he may vex those who believe; but he can harm them not at all unless by Allah's leave. In Allah let believers put their trust. {She That Disputeth LVII (Soora Al-Mujadila) Verse 10 and 11}.

b- "With hearts preoccupied. And they confer in secrets". {The Prophets XXI (Soora Al-Anbia) Verse 3}.

c- "There is no good in much of their secret conferences save (in) him who enjoineth almsgiving and kindness and peace-making among the people.{Women IV (Soora Al-Nisa) Verse 114).

MEDIA TRIALS NEGATES QURAN:

a- O ye who believe! Let not a folk deride a folk who may be better than they (are), nor let women (deride) women who may be better than they are; neither defame one another by nicknames. Bad is the name of lewdness after faith. And whoso turneth not in repentance, such are evildoers. {Private Apartments XLIX (Soora Al-Hujrat) Verse 11).

b- O ye who believe! Shun much suspicion ; for lo! some suspicion is a crime. And spy not, neither back bite one another. Would one of you love to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Ye abhor that (so abhor the other)! And keep your duty (to Allah). Lo! Allah is relenting and Merciful.{Private Apartments XLIX (Soora Al-Hujrat) Verse 12).

UNLAWFUL ENTRY NEGATES QURAN:

a- O ye who believe! Enter not houses other than your own without first announcing your presence and invoking peace upon the folk thereof. That is better for you, that ye may be heedful. {Light XXIV (Soora Al-Noor) Verse 27}.

FALSE WITNESSES NEGATES QURAN:

a- O ye who believe! If an evil-liver bring you tidings, verify it, lest ye smite some folk in ignorance and afterward repent what ye did {Private Apartments XLIX (Soora Al-Hujrat) Verse 6).

b- (O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! The hearing and the sight and the heart- of each of these it will be asked. {Children of Israel XVII (Soora Bani Israel) Verse 36}.

c- Lo! Allah commandeth you that ye restore deposits to their owners, and, if ye judge between mankind, that ye judge justly. Lo! Allah is ever Hearer, Seer {Women - IV (Soora Al-Nisa) Verse 58}.

d- O ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is informed of what ye do {The Table Spread V (Soora Al-Maida) Verse 8}.

e- And those who accuse honorable women but bring not four witnesses, scourge them (with) eighty stripes and never (afterwards) accept their testimony. They indeed are evil doers {Light - XXIV (Soora Al-Noor) Verse 4}.

Holy Prophet Muhammad {PBUH} said: He who misappropriates the right of a Muslim by taking a false oath, Allah will make the fire of Hell expatiate for him and will declare Paradise forbidden for him. A person said to him: Messenger of Allah, even if it is something insignificant? He {PBUH} replied: Yes, even if it is the twig of the Arakk tree. {Muslim}

POLICE TORTURE IN THE LIGHT OF HADITHS:

1- Holy Prophet Muhammad {PBUH} said: A woman was tormented because of a cat, which she had confined until it died and she had to get to Hell. She did not allow it either to eat or drink as it was confined nor did she free it so that it might eat the insects of the earth. {Muslim}.

Note: Keep in mind that above Hadith is about a cat and what our State do with innocent citizens in the name of Interrogations must be reviewed rather this whole method be dumped. Human Life is far superior than Cat and Hazrat Omer {RA} declared that life of a Muslim is sacred than Holy Kaaba. All those who were persecuted in Pakistan were Muslims but Mullahs and their Decree Issuing tongues were tied before 9/11.

2- Ibn Umar {RA} reported that he happened to pass by some young men of the Quraish who had tied a bird at which they have been shooting arrows. Every arrow that they missed came into the possession the owner of the bird. No sooner did they see Ibn Umer {RA} they went away. Thereupon Ibn Umer {RA} said: Who has done this? Allah has cursed him who does so? Verily, Holy Prophet Muhammad {PBUH} invokes curse upon one who makes a living thing the target (of one's marksmanship). {Agreed Upon Hadith}.

3- Abu Masud {RA} reported: I was beating my slave with a whip when I heard a voice behind me. It was: Abu Masud, bear in mind. I did not recognize the voice due to intense anger. Abu Masud reported: As he came near me, I found that he was the Messanger of Allah {PBUH} who was saying: Bear in mind, Abu Masud, bear in mind Abu Masud. Abu Masud said: I threw the whip from my hand. There upon he {PBUH} said: Bear in mind, Abu Masud: Verily Allah has more dominance upon you than you have upon your slave. Then I said: I would never beat my servant in future. {Muslim}.

PREREQUISITE FOR JUDGES AND LAW ENFORCERS:

a- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: The people before went astray and were ruined because if a noble person committed theft, they used to leave him but if a weak person among them committed theft, they used to inflict the legal punishment on him. By Allah, if Fatima, the daughter of Mohammad, committed theft, I will cut off her hand. (Agreed upon Hadith).

b- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: If Allah appointed anyone of you rules over a people and he died when he was still treacherous to his people, Allah would forbid his entry into Paradise. {Bukhari and Muslim}.

c- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: He who doesnot look after his subjects with goodwill sincerity will be deprived of the fragrance of Paradise. {Ref}.

d- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: A ruler who having control over the affairs of the Muslims, doesnot strive diligently for their betterment and does not serve them sincerely, will not enter Paradise with them. {Ref}.

e- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: Allah, when one who is appointed as a ruler over my people troubles them, you should trouble him also and when he adopts a gentle attitude towards them, you should show mercy to him. {Muslim}.

f- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: Fulfil the covenant of allegiance which is sworn first (then swear allegiance to the others). Conced to them their due rights and ask Allah for that which is due to you. Allah will call them to account in respect of the subjects whom He had entrusted them. {Bukhari and Muslim}.

g- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: If Allah invites some one with administration over the Muslims and he shows negligence towards fulfilling their needs and objects and removal of property, He will act in a similar way on the Day of Judgement. {Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi}.

h- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: The best of your rulers are those whom you love and who love you, who invoke Allah's blessing upon you and you invoke His blessings upon them. The worst of your rulers are those whom you hate and who hate you and whom you curse and who curse you. It was asked (by those who were present): Should not we overthrow them with the help of sword. He said: No, as long as they establish prayer among you. {Muslim}.

i- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: It is obligatory upon a Muslim that he should listen (to the ruler) and obey whether he likes it or not except when he is ordered to do a sinful thing, in such case there is no obligation to listen or to obey. {Agreed Upon Hadith}.

j- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: Do not long for position of authority. If you are granted this position without asking for it you will be helped in discharging its responsibilities, but if you are given it as a result of your requesting for it, you will be left alone as its captive. If you take an oath to do a thing and then find a better alternative, you should adopt the latter and expiate your oath. {Agreed Upon Hadith}.

k- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said to Abu Zarr (RA): Abu Zarr, I find you weak and I desire for you what I desire for myself. Do not rule over (even) two persons and do not manage an orphan's property. {Muslim}.

l- Abu Zarr (RA) said to The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH): Why do you not appoint me a collector? He (PBUH) patted me on the shoulder and with his hand and said: Abu Zarr, you are a weak man and it is a trust and it will be a cause of disgrace and repentance on the Day of Resurrection except for one who takes it up with a full sense of responsibility and fulfils what is entrusted to him (discharge its obligations efficiently). {Muslim}.

m- The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said to Abu Huraira (RA): You will be greedy for getting a position of authority, but remember that it will be a cause of humiliation and repentance on the Day of Resurrection. {Bukhari}.

n- Hazrat Abu Musa Ashari (RA) said to The Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH): Messenger of Allah, appoint me governor of some land over which Allah gave you ruling authority. The other also requested for something to the same effect. The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: By Allah, do not appoint against this post anyone who seeks it and is greedy for it. {Agreed Upon Hadith}.

o- When Hazrat ABU ZAR (RA) requested the Holy Prophet (PBUH) for appointment to a public office, the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)said, "public office is a trust, a source of lamentation and remorse on the Day of Judgement".{Muslim}.

p- "To treat people equally in your presence in your company and in your decisions so that the weak despair not of justice and the strong have no hope of favour". {Hazrat Omer (RA)'s advisory note to Koofa (Iraq)'s Governor}.

Read an interesting article below

Legitimizing the extra-judicial killings PAK TRIBUNE REPORT Tuesday November 01, 2005 (1208 PST)

It may be surprising for others but not for Pakistanis that an elected prime minister could be ousted, jailed and even hanged on the charges of extra-judicial killings, but the real people behind it always remain untouchables no matter if political parties or army rule the country. Who are these untouchables? Of course, the police, the state`s one of the most lethal and cruel tools.

On November 6, 1996, the then Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) government, led by Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was dismissed by the former President, Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari on the charges of corruption, misuse of authority, and most importantly, the extra-judicial killings in Karachi during 1994 to 1996. Hundreds of people, mostly political activists belonging to the Muttehida Quami Movement (MQM), a major coalition partner in incumbent federal and provincial governments. The MQM claims that thousands of its activists were killed in fake police encounters since June 19, 1992 to October 12, 1999 in the successive governments of Nawaz Sharif, Benazir Bhutto and again Nawaz Sharif.

The MQM blames the late Chief of Army Staff, General Asif Nawaz for the army action and extra-judicial murders of its workers in Karachi, Hyderabad, and other urban areas of Sindh. The alleged army action was commenced on June 19, 1992 when the MQM had been in power both in the center and the province. A majority of MQM leaders, including ministers, MNAs and MPAs had gone underground to avoid raids and arrests. The MQM Chief Altaf Hussein had left for London much before the operation started where he had applied for political assylum, and has recently got the UK citizenship. Hundreds (MQM claims thousands) of workers were arrested by the law enforcing agencies, while Brigadier Haroon of Pakistan Army claimed to have recovered huge cache of weapons, tools used for torture and maps of Jinnahpur(a seprate homeland for Mohajirs) from the alleged torture cells run by the MQM in different parts of Karachi and Hyderabad. The MQM alleges that thousands of its workers had been brutally tortured and killed by the law enforcing agencies ( army, rangers and police) during Karachi operation, and generally, the police were used for that. The government of the then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was dismissed by former President Ghulam Ishaq Khan in 1993, but operation against MQM continued. In the wake of general elections in 1993, former Premier Benazir Bhutto came into power for the second time. Surprisingly, the MQM which had been lambasting Nawaz Sharif for operation against its workers, made adjustments with the PML(N) in provincial assembly elections in Karachi, Hyderabad and Mirpurkhas in 1993. The MQM`s checkered politics took another dramatic turn when it had decided to support Farooq Ahmed Leghari, the PPP`s candidate for the post of president thus helping him have an easy entry to the president house in 1993 president election. However, the relations between the PPP and the MQM had gone bitter in the end of 1993 when the latter blamed the former for violating the agreement struck between the two parties on the eve of president election. Whereas, the PPP had started to blame the MQM for unleashing and patronizing terrorism in the city The spree of extra-judicial murders reached at its zenith in 1994 when the then Interior Minister, and a former army general, Major General Naseerullah Khan Babar took the reigns of alleged operation in his hand. From1994 to 1996 (till the ouster of Ms Bhutto`s second government), the MQM had intended to nominate Mr Babar in almost all the FIRs in connection with extra-judicial killings of its activists, which understandably could not be done as the police had refused to register FIR against the former interior minister. Mr Babar had imported a police officer Shoaib Saddal from Islamabad as DIG Karachi in 1995 who later was indicted in the extra-judicial murder of Mir Murtaza Bhutto, the younger brother of Benazir Bhutto and chief of its own faction, the PPP(Shaheed Bhutto). Murtaza Bhutto was killed in a police encounter on September 20, 1996 just a few steps away from his 70 Clifton residence.

During Karachi operation, several police officers had not merely earned popularity for their involvement in extra-judicial killings but also got promotions for killing the political activists in fake encounters. SHO New Karachi Police Station, Inspector Bahadur Ali had emerged as an anti-MQM police officer in 1992 as the MQM had blamed him for various fake encounters, torture and registration of fake cases against its activists. Bhadur Ali was later assassinated by "unknown terrorists" in 1993. His son Irfan Bahdur was appointed as a DSP directly by the then government as compensation. In 1995, a team of anti-MQM officers was set up by the then DIG Shoaib Saddal which included Inspector Zeeshan Kazmi, Inspector Aslam Hayat, Inspector Chaudry Aslam Khan, Inspector Sarwar Commando, Inspector Taufiq Zahid, Inspector Rao Anwar Khan, Inspector Bahauddin and Inspector Nasir Zaidi. This team was later patronized by a former IG Sindh, Maqbool Rana during the second stint of Nawaz Sharif from 1997 to 1999. These officers emerged as a sign of terror for the MQM as the latter blamed the former for unleashing a reign of extra-judicial killings of its activists. Inspector Aslam Chaudry who now has been promoted to the post of SP, had raided the MQM`s headquarters commonly known as Nine-Zero in 1999 and allegedly harrassed the party leaders present there including a former senator Aftab Shaikh. Inspector Rao Anwar had allegedly killed some accused (MQM activists) who were on remand. Rao Anwar claimed that he was taking the accused to the police station, some unidentified terrorists attacked the police vehicle. As a result, all the accused were killed but surprisingly, all the policemen remained unhurt.

Inspector Zeeshan Kazmi had earned the reputation of a police officerwho was not answerable to even the IG and DIG. These officers were also charged with receiving heavy bribes from the families of the political workers for their release. The MQM leaders by time and again had vowed to bring these officers to the justice whenever it came into power. The MQM Chief Altaf Hussein had even threatened to move to the international court of justice against the extra judicial killings. Dr Farooq Sattar, Kanwar Khalid Younas, Aftab Shaikh, Nasreen Jalil and others used to hold successive press conferences at Karachi Press Club during that entire period to inform the newsmen about the extra-judicial activities of these police officers. They had repeated their plans to bring these officers to the justice in the press conferences. Of course, some of them have been brought to the "justice". Inspector Zeeshan Kazmi , Inspector Aslam Hayat, Inspector Taufiq Zahid and various other police personnel known to be anti-MQM have been assassinated during last three years.

The remaining unwanted police officers have now become the blue-eyed boys of the MQM. When the incumbent Sindh government was installed in the wake of October 2002 elections, the then advisor to Chief Minister on Home Affairs, Aftab Shaikh had transferred some of these unwanted police officers including Aslam Chaudry, Irfan Bahadur, and Taufiq Zahifd to the interior of Sindh, however, no case was registered against them. A single-column news appeared in the newspapers at the advent of this year stunned the MQM workers but not the political analysts. The news was about the appointment of Chaudry Aslam as in charge of the newly established Industrial Crime Unit with DSP Irfan Bahdur , and Inspector Sarwar Commando his assistants. The latest news is that another undesirable officer Rao Anwar who had been on long leave and enjoying the festivties of federal capital, has also joined the ICU. Other Karachi operation master officers, Inspector Nasir Jafri, Inspector Bahauddin are also enjoying the impunity granted by the coalition government.

The Sindh Interior Minister Rauf Siddiqui who belongs to MQM has "no words" to praise the performance of Aslam Chaudry and company. And it is understandable, as Aslam Chaudry had managed to arrest the former underworld don. Shoaib Khan a few months ago, who had allured hundreds of MQM workers. Shoaib Khan, once an untouchable, died in Central Jail Karachi in mysterious circumstances. This situation is embarrassing and antagonizing for the MQM activists who have to defend their party, which is patronizing the "killers" of their friends and partymen. They are unable to comprehend that why their party has legitimized the extra-judicial killings of its activists? Rauf Siddiqui and other MQM leaders have no idea that how pinching it is for their party workers when they (MQM leaders) praise and patronize the police officials who earlier had been declared "butchers" and "killers" of their friends and colleagues. But they should understand that this is politics wherein , the blood of ordinary political workers is not thicker than water. Their blood is meant for being exploited by their leaders. Ends


1- Families of missing Muttahida men assured of help By Our Reporter

http://www.dawn.com/2004/11/01/nat8.htm

2- Holy Quran.

3- Riayd-us-Swaleheen by Imam Nuwvi {Rehmatullah Aleh} [Hadiths].

4- Legitimizing the extra-judicial killings PAK TRIBUNE REPORT Tuesday November 01, 2005 (1208 PST)

http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.php?id=124234