Officers rule while soldiers shed their blood: Haqqani's counsel tells Supreme Court

Concluding her arguments in the Memogate controversy, Asma Jahangir, counsel for former ambassador to USA Husain Haqqani, again argued that petitions were not maintainable and that due process of law had been ignored in the case. A nine-member Supreme Court bench has been hearing the case.
In their rebuttals, however, Barrister Zafarullah and Advocate Tariq Asad told the bench that petitions were quite maintainable because sovereignty of the country was at stake. Haqqani's counsel contended, "Mansoor Ijaz had been writing against ISI for the last three years and has also been quoted by a Hindu writer that Mansoor met with RAW authorities in Kashmir but ISI head was not able to observe what our untrained eyes visualised then. How they would be able to defend us?"
She also contended that the memo was a matter of tension between the civilian government and army while Haqqani had been sandwiched between the two institutions. According to the CJP, the Army Chief deserves respect because armed forces' personnel defend country's frontiers and have made a lot of sacrifices. Jahangir retorted that "Army officers rule while soldiers shed their blood for the country's defence."
She further argued that every office was respectable, but every office could also make mistakes. The CJP asked Asma not to take the matter lightly, arguing that if the matter of memo was of an ordinary nature then why key meetings were held at the President House where the President, the PM, the COAS, the DG ISI and Husain Haqqani were present.
Jahangir said that the Army Chief's affidavit submitted to the SC was reasonable because it was his team that had brought the memo issue to his knowledge. Referring to the affidavit of former US National Security Advisor James Jones, the Chief Justice observed that instead of giving importance to our own people (armed forces chief) James' affidavit was unnecessarily being considered more credible.
"If you talk about credibility then how Mansoor Ijaz has become credible?" Jahangir questioned. Reading out the texts of some messages between Ijaz and Haqqani, she argued that Ijaz was the person who appeared eager to establish contact with Haqqani but the latter did not respond him even once. She also reiterated that Haqqani worked very hard for the prestige of Pakistan, "but in return he was disgraced."
Asma added that the SC order to bar Haqqani from travelling out of the country was against the fundamental rights. But the CJP said that Haqqani had not been stopped from going out. According to him, Haqqani is required to get permission from the SC before he leaves the country. Jahangir requested the court to dismiss petitions regarding memo scandal with huge cost "as the petitioners are rich personalities."
Referring to several news items regarding torture on Husain Haqqani during Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) regime, Asma claimed that the petitioners had a personal grudge against her client. The court adjourned the hearing till Friday (today).
APP adds: Hearing petitions in memo case filed by Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif and others, the Chief Justice remarked, "we are here because of the Parliament as it did not endorse any part of action of the dictator which is perceptible and the court has respect for the Parliament.
He also expressed displeasure over the news item published in various newspapers regarding the National Assembly and said, the court proceedings were not correctly reported in several newspapers and it should not be repeated. The bench directed editors of those newspapers which published such news item wrongly attributing to Chief Justice of Pakistan to publish clarification about the said report and warned them to pass judicial order if not done (publication of clarification) properly. About President, the Chief Justice observed, "The President is head of the State and we have respect according to the Constitution."