To the delight of the Zardari/Gilani government, its supporters and hangers-on, Mansoor Ijaz, the central figure in the memo scandal, has expressed his inability to appear before the judicial commission investigating the case. Citing threats to his life and the forensic evidence he was to bring along, he has requested the commission to record his statement and examine the evidence either in Zurich or London. No show summoned celebration in the government camp.
Among others, Rehman Malik declared triumphantly that Ijaz has been exposed, and "it seems his fake drama has flopped." Hussain Haqqani, the key suspect in the case, lost no time to jump up and submit an application to the commission, through his counsel, for closing Ijaz's right of recording his statement at an outside venue.
Ijaz, of course, is not to blame for having cold feet. Anyone in his place would feel the same way. A couple of days before his scheduled arrival in Pakistan, Prime Minister Gilani made contemptuous remarks about his security, saying he is not a viceroy (note the slavish mentality). More to the point, he said as per the rules of business the Ministry of Interior would provide security to Ijaz, and if required, it could call in the Army or the Rangers to assist the civil government. And that only he (the PM) had the authority to assign a thanedar for the purpose. Indeed, the Prime Minister does, except for the fact that in the present case his government itself is a suspect (he had stated on an earlier occasion that as prime minister he would take responsibility for any wrongdoing in the case). It made sense therefore for the witness to want the commission to appoint someone from the army rather than the police to act as the focal person for his security.
It is not known how true are the prime witness' complaints that he had been constantly receiving threats from governmental quarters. What is known is that the Interior Minister had threatened that Ijaz could be detained and investigated under Article 6 of the Constitution (considering that the said article deals with treason, one is at a loss to understand as to how a foreign citizen can be tried for treason) for conspiring to topple Benazir's government back in 1989. PPP's Raja Riaz, Leader of the Opposition in the Punjab Assembly, talking to the media on Monday iterated that Ijaz has been hatching conspiracies against state institutions of Pakistan and has also been maligning them; therefore a case could be registered against him under Article 6. Further ratcheting up the pressure, Rehman Malik said that "if the PCNS [Parliamentary Committee on National Security] so desires Ijaz's name could be placed on the Exit Control List."
To make matters worse the government and its friends have kept a smear campaign going to discredit Ijaz. A TV channel sympathetic to it crossed all limits of decency the other day, interrupting a programme with the 'breaking news' that Ijaz is a Qadiani, and that he is against the PPP because its founding chairman Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's government had declared followers of his faith outside the pale of Islam. The 'news' thus sought to harm Ijaz's credibility as a witness, and in so doing also put a question mark on that community's loyalty to this country. Others have been referring to a video featuring him as a commentator in a women's wrestling event to raise questions about his morality. Clearly, the government and its beneficiaries are ready to descend to any level of impropriety to stop him from giving evidence.
Whether Mansoor Ijaz is a good or a bad man should not be our concern. In any case, he is not a Pakistani citizen, and claims no love for this country. He is an American. As an American citizen, over the years, he has discovered a place for himself in the political limelight as an intermediary in trouble spots of interest to his country, such as the Sudan and Kashmir. Apparently, it was in the same spirit that he pushed the controversial memo in the aftermath of the American raid into Abbotabad to take out bin Laden. Small wonder then that he wants to prove himself right before the commission to salvage his reputation and continue his career elsewhere as a back channel go-between for his country.
In a strange turn of events, this American now stands on the side of those in this country who want to establish the truth while our former ambassador to Washington, backed by the Zardari government, is intent on a cover-up. As noted earlier, the government has been using scare tactics to prevent him from coming to Pakistan.
Haqqani's wife, Farah Naz Ispahani, who had an office and residence inside the Presidency as an advisor, has fled to Washington where she has been making all sorts of unsavoury statements about those wanting to get to the truth. Haqqani claims he left his Blackberry sets in Washington, and can't remember where to find them. He may have a bad memory, but Ijaz's record of the BBM exchanges with him must contain his PIN, which he can use-ie, if he is willing to cooperate with the commission - to ask the Canada-based BlackBerry service provider, Research In Motion, to provide the record for the commission's examination. But for that to happen Ijaz must give his statement and present the forensic evidence, he says, is in his possession. The commission has a mandate from the Supreme Court to collect evidence inside and outside Pakistan. For now, it has deferred its decision on Haqqani's application to foreclose the option of recording the witness' statement abroad.
At its Tuesday's proceedings the commission gave another chance to Ijaz to appear before it by February 9, saying that if he is dissatisfied with the security arrangements, its secretary can record his statement and collect the evidence from him before he disembarks from the plane, and escort him all along his stay in this country.
Meanwhile, some in the pro-government and pro-US commentariat are claiming that the issue has been settled behind-the-scenes. Which merits the question, what was there to settle in the absence of culpability? Anyway, it is possible that Ijaz has backed down on the urging of his government. After all, the memo offered US humiliating concessions vis-à-vis Pakistan's security and foreign policy matters. Washington wouldn't want to cause further embarrassment to this government. Does that mean we may never get to know the truth?
[email protected]
Comments
Comments are closed.