Supreme Court condemns Haqqani

On 30 December 2011, exercising its constitutional jurisdiction, the Supreme Court of Pakistan constituted a Commission for investigating the matter of Mr Haqqani’s authorship of a memo which was addressed to the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen. The memo was delivered to the Admiral through General (Retired) James Logan Jones (former US National Security Advisor). 

The Commission reported back to the Supreme Court in relation to Mr Haqqani who, in the wake of the memo scandal, resigned as Pakistan’s Ambassador to the US on 22 November 2011. The following paragraphs of the Commission’s report were published in the Supreme Court’s Order

Final Conclusion and Findings:

(1) The Hon’ble Supreme Court appointed this Commission to probe, “to ascertain the origin, authenticity and purpose of creating / drafting of Memo for delivering it to Chairman of the Us Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen.”

(2) It has been incontrovertibly established that the Memorandum was authentic and Mr. Haqqani was the originator and architect of the Memorandum. Mr. Haqqani Sought American Help; he also wanted to create a niche for himself making himself forever indispensable to the Americans. He lost sight of the fact that he is a Pakistani Citizen and Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States of America, and therefore his loyalty could only be to Pakistan.

(3) Mr. Haqqani’s by offering his services as part of a proposed ‘national security team’ to a foreign government, voicing the ‘great fears’ that ‘Pakistan’s nuclear assets are now legitimate targets’ and thus seeking to bring ‘Pakistan’s nuclear assets under a more verifiable, transparent regime,’ stating that ISI maintains ‘relations to the Taliban’ and offering to ‘eliminate Section S of the ISI and to help ‘ pigeon – hole the forces lined up against your interests’ created fissures in the body politic and were acts of disloyalty to Pakistan, that contravened the Constitution of Pakistan.

(4) The purpose of the Memorandum was to show that the civilian government was friends of America, but needed to be strengthened to prevail upon the army and the intelligence agencies, and to be able to do so American help was required to set up a civilian national security team, to be headed by Mr. Haqqani.

(5) There can be no two views that terrorism must be contested, terrorists fought, nuclear proliferation opposed, civilians (and not the military) determine foreign policy and the ship of State guided by civilian hands at the helm; however, what is not acceptable is for Pakistan’s Ambassador to beseech a foreign government to with impunity meddle in and run our affairs.

(6) We may observe that Mr. Haqqani has chosen not to live in Pakistan, has been working in USA, where he appeared to have made his life, held no property or asset in Pakistan, held no money (save a paltry amount ) in a Pakistani bank, but despite having no obvious ties to Pakistan was appointed to the extremely sensitive position of Pakistan’s Ambassador to the USA, and in addition to being paid a salary and accompanying emoluments was handed a largesse of over an amount of two million dollars a year.

Mr Haqqani was allowed to exit Pakistan with the leave of the Supreme Court and is now expected to return to Pakistan at the agreed time for appearance which, according to the Court, was four days’ time. Under the Order, the case has been adjourned for two weeks’ time.

Opponents of Pakistan’s free judiciary would consider the text of the order to be siding with the military. But it is clear that Mr Haqqani was acting outside of his mission, to represent Pakistan as a sovereign nation, as Ambassador in America. The battle between the judiciary and government will continue and is an interesting contest to observe.

It is pretty disgraceful how people with no real connection to Pakistan can serve in high offices of the state. The Supreme Court, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry CJ presiding, explained at paragraph 7 of the Order that

Prima facie it seems that Mr. Hussain Haqqani, former Ambassador of Pakistan in USA has to answer about the findings so recorded by the Commission. He was allowed to leave the country with the commitment vide order 30.1.2012 that whenever the Court requires, he will appear in person within a period of four days, therefore, we direct his presence on the next date of hearing, which shall be intimated by the office according to the rules.

In the meantime, the people of Pakistan, who suffer the multiple problems of inflation (increasing petrol and food prices) and unemployment will probably just be happy to have some water and electricity to get through the hot summer.

The Court’s Order is available below

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: