While other crimes that Ajmal Pahari has been accused of can only be proven or otherwise thru a fair trial, however some glaring flaws and obvious fabrications in the JIT report are enough to prove the fairness of such reports:
- The report connects Ajmal Pahari with the murder of Major Kaleem, which is an absolutely false and ridiculous accusation as proven from none other than the fact that Major Kaleem is still alive. How could he possibly commit the murder of a person still alive?
- Then the report directly accuses Pahari of killing two of MQM’s own senators, Nishat Mallick & Mustafa Kamal Rizvi, in 2002 whereas Ajmal Pahari, as also proven from newspaper reports, was arrested in 2000 only to be released in 2005. How could he possibly kill someone from inside the jail?
- Further, the report also blames Ajmal Pahari for killing editor of Takbeer, Salahuddin, whereas in 1999 the daughter of Salahuddin, Sadia Anjum, herself alleged that her father was killed by her ex-husband, Rafiq Afghan, who is currently the editor of Ummat newspaper, for purpose of occupying the estate of his father and this is also why she sought separation from her husband.
- And lastly, the JIT also accuses Ajmal Pahari of killing JI’s Ameer of Bin Qasim in Karachi, Mirza Luqman Baig, whereas the fact is that Luqman Baig was killed over dispute on a masjid in Landhi in 1999. This is evident from an FIR lodged in the Landhi police station in 1999 by JI’s own leader, Aslam Mujahid, who was a trustee of this masjid. Mujahid in his FIR named other trustees of the masjid as accused murderers of Mirza Luqman Baig. These accused murderers included Asharaf Ali, Majid, Luddun, Shahid and Ishtiaq and all of them were affiliated with the MQM-Haqiqi, which was in control of the Landhi town in 1999 whereas the same town was, to common knowledge, a no-go area for MQM activists.
Also note two important points that undoubtedly prove that Ajmal’s confession has been taken under coercion & duress:
- The JIT says Ajmal Pahari confessed to the murder of one of Nawaz Sharif’s lawyers, Iqbal Raad. This is preposterous because Ajmal Pahari has already been acquitted in the murder case of Iqbal Raad by none other than the Sindh High Court. Is it possible for a person to confess to a murder that he has been acquitted of by the High Court on his own free-will? Certainly not – such confession can only happen by way of coercion because even if a person did commit a murder he would never (unless he is being coerced) admit to a murder that he has been acquitted of by the relevant court of law.
- Looking at the video of Ajmal Pahari’s confession, he time and again raises his hands for one reason or the other (scratch his face, hold his ear, etc) and it clearly shows he is handcuffed. Nowhere in the world is a confession of a handcuffed man accepted as a free-will statement; this is an established principle of law and not some raw logic and yet the CJ conveniently ignores such glaring and established evidence of coercion and finds such statement sufficient enough to repeatedly refer to it during the suo-moto proceedings.
Two more important points indicative of the lack of credibility of the JIT report:
- The transcript of JIT investigation report says that Ajmal Pahari confessed that he and the MQM were working to disintegrate urban Sindh fromPakistan. Whereas when you listen to the video confession, Ajmal Pahari clearly denies that he or MQM ever had any plans or discussions for a separate state. This is glaring fabrication and nothing else.
- What is often cited as a reason for the credibility of Ajmal Pahari’s JIT, and that of others as well, is that the Joint Investigation team also includes ISI and MI and since these are not under any political party therefore they are assumed to be absolutely neutral and truthful. Firstly, ISI and MI are not politically neutral at all or we would not have seen emergence of the Haqiqi, the Q-league, the PPP-Patriots, etc. Secondly and more importantly, this same ISI and MI gave reports on CJ Iftikhar Chaudhry (at time of his removal by President Musharraf) that was much ridiculed and demonized as falsity and fabrication. Should not we also deem these reports on CJ as correct because they were made by ISI and MI? And if we don’t, why the double standards Mr. CJ? Aren’t you aware of the settled principle of law that a statement given to the police or any other investigation agency is by default considered to have been taken under duress and therefore the same is disregarded relative to the statement given by the accused in the court of law that is assumed to be his actual and truthful statement given on his own free-will?
And lastly, the most important point of all:
- Almost all of the alleged target killers linked to the MQM, including Ajmal Pahari interestingly have yet to be produced in court for perusal of cases against them. In cases, where counsel of such target killers themselves sought to expedite prosecution of his client, such counsels were assassinated to ensure the same could not happen as in the case of Zia Alam who was a counsel representing Ajmal Pahari and was killed while he was seeking court’s intervention to start judicial proceedings against his client.
- Even in case of some of these accused killers whose case have been taken to courts, the police has ensured that these cases don’t go towards the point where the accused gives his statement in front of the court and his counsel. These facts seem to suggest that the government fears that such statement given by the accused will be entirely different from the coercion-based confessions to the police and JIT otherwise one fails to understand the reason for delay in prosecution of these alleged target killers. But of course if the statement of these accused persons in court clearly refutes their statement to the police then it would pretty much neutralize government’s bargaining chip vis-à-vis MQM and therefore the need to ensure that such statements don’t happen at all (or else MQM would be able to counter the propaganda of such JIT report by referring to the statement given by these alleged killers in court).
- Why didn’t the CJ ordered inquiry into Zia Alam’s murder for the whole conspiracy to be unmasked?