Faizabad sit-in: It seems commission aimed at exonerating Faiz Hameed: CJP

ISLAMABAD: Blasting the Faizabad sit-in commission’s report, Chief Justice of Pakistan said Monday it appears as if the entire exercise was done to exonerate ex-spymaster Lt Gen (R) Faiz Hameed, reports Geo News.

The CJP questioned how many times ex-spymaster Faiz Hameed had been referred to (in the report). “It seems that all this was done just to exonerate General Faiz,” he observed.

“It is astonishing that the statement of Tehreek-e-Labaik Pakistan (TLP) was not recorded,” the court noted. The CJP said, “The TLP people might have helped if they were summoned. They were a party in this case and their point of view was important.” The CJP said that the commission just submitted the report with idioms in it.

The court held that the commission had not followed its terms of reference (ToRs). A three-member SC bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, heard the Faizabad dharna judgment implementation case.

The court held that the report, furnished by the inquiry commission, was not in accordance with the ToRs, set for it. The court directed the attorney general for Pakistan (AGP) to submit stance of the federal government, asking whether the government endorsed the inquiry commission report or not.

The court ordered to send copies of the report to the chairman and members of the inquiry commission, and to submit a written reply on the matter within two weeks, or to appear and explain.

The court observed that the inquiry commission crossed its limits, adding that statements of some people were taken on oath, while some were sent queries. During the hearing, the CJP observed that had the Faizabad dharna case verdict been implemented, the incident of May 9 would not have happened, adding that the inquiry commission wasted time.

“I do not understand as to what level of mind prepared this report, and the commission does not know what their responsibility was,” the CJP remarked, adding that the report had been prepared on the statement of General Faiz Hameed.

“How the people of commission were in the Police Department? It’s like asking a thief if you did not steal anything,” the CJP questioned, adding that how were the senior bureaucrats; it seemed as if they were trembling after seeing the report.

The chief justice remarked that the DG ISI said that it was not their mandate to look into the financial affairs of terrorists. “If not theirs, then whose responsibility it was,” the CJP questioned.

The CJP said that in one paragraph of the report, they said that it was not the responsibility of the ISI to look into financial matters, while in another paragraph, they wrote that no evidence of financial support to the TLP was found.

“The commission said that whosoever was doing [something], was not responsible, but the Punjab government,” the CJP said, adding that the commission was saying that Rana Sanaullah was running the Punjab government; he is the one who is responsible, but did not say, who violated the oath.

Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan observed that the inquiry commission took the statement of Absar Alam on oath, but sent questionnaire to General Faiz Hameed. Attorney General Mansoor Usman read out the relevant parts and recommendations of the inquiry commission report and told the court that the report was vague and unclear, adding that the responsible persons were not determined by the commission, as per the ToRs.

Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan said something had to be done for averting lawlessness. The CJP remarked that the commission said that the protestors should not have come from Punjab to Islamabad, adding that if the IGP Punjab was to be held responsible, then his name should have been mentioned, instead of Rana Sanaullah.

The chief justice said that how much damage had been done to Pakistan by the Faizabad sit-in, one should read the Supreme Court’s decision. “I am disappointed with the report of the inquiry commission. They say just move on; how can you move forward without learning from the past,” the CJP questioned, adding that the commission did not draw any conclusion on anything, though it was its job to determine as to who were responsible for it.

The CJP further said that the inquiry commission took the authority of the parliament and the court, but did not do what it was supposed to do. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan questioned as to why the commission marked only Punjab; it has been written that promotion is given to those who have worked in the hard area, and all the districts of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa have been written in the hard area.

“Are there not any hard areas in the rest of the provinces,” the judge questioned. Attorney General Mansoor Usman said that according to the commission, Faiz Hameed said in the statement that the ISI did not fund the sit-in.

The CJP, however, said that Faiz Hameed gave the fatwa, and the commission accepted it, adding that the commission even did not dare to summon Faiz Hameed and even did not write his name in its report.

Justice Irfan Saadat Khan said the commission also said something for the SC judges, saying that the decision of Mustafa Impex case should be re-examined. The court sought the stance of the federal government over the commission report.