'Boss' Zardari had no involvement in Memogate: Commission report

Published: June 16, 2012

Memo commission says they found no evidence which proved Zardari was involved in the memo.

ISLAMABAD: The Memogate Commission in its findings has exonerated President Asif Ali Zardari from any direct involvement in the memo scandal.

The commission conceded in its final report, presented before a larger bench of the Supreme Court that “no evidence was produced before us that would indicate that the President Asif Ali Zardari had either authorised the preparation of the memorandum or directed that it be sent to the American administration…”

The report submitted by the commission to the Supreme Court found guilty, however, former ambassador of Pakistan to the United States Husain Haqqani for preparing the memorandum. The commission, however, mentioned that it was also its considered view that Haqqani led Mansoor Ijaz into believing the memo had the authority of President Zardari.

Pakistani-American businessman and the main character in the memogate, Mansoor Ijaz, who conveyed it to the then US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen at the behest of Haqqani, failed to satisfy the commission that President Zardari had prior knowledge of the memorandum. The report added that Ijaz also confessed he did not have any validating proof in support of his claim.

The commission comprising three provincial chief justices headed by Balochistan High Court’s Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa had investigated the scandal thoroughly over five-months. Justice Mushir Alam, Chief Justice Sindh High Court and Chief Justice Islamabad High Court Justice Iqbal Hameed-ur-Rahman were the other two members of the commission.

In its final report the commission discussed the claims made by Mansoor Ijaz.

According to Ijaz, the memorandum had the support of President Zardari and in this regard he testified, “…he [Hussain Haqqani] said that it was coming from the President of Pakistan who wanted to put together a new national security team similar to the national security organization in the US. I agreed to help Haqqani and asked him what is the message he wants to be conveyed?”

Ijaz further told the commission during its proceedings that “He [Haqqani] then stated that in view of the sensitivity of the matter subsequent communication between us should, whilst referring to United States of America refer to “Isphani”, which was the name of his wife, and if referring to Pakistan government should refer to as “friends.”

According to Ijaz, in subsequent BBM messages Haqqani made the reference more specific by using the word “friend” for President of Pakistan. He also used word “boss” for him. The term “bad boys” was meant for Chief of Army Staff and ISI. Haqqani convoyed that to him (Ijaz) “If my friend and I feel sufficiently empowered in relation to the bad boys, I will ensure we get candor.”

The report said that the commission had sent a questionnaire to Ijaz and asked him if he could corroborate it with any other person including President Zardari. To this, Ijaz confessed that he has no documentary proof but had only relied and accepted Haqqani’s words that he had the approval of President Zardari.

Reader Comments (28)

  • Mohammad Ali Siddiqui
    Jun 16, 2012 - 10:38PM

    Former Pakistan Ambassador to US Mr. Hussain Haqqani after Abbottabad ‘Operation Geronimo’ by US Navy SEAL’s was trying to become more loyal than the King, but he is ‘caught behind’.

    Recommend

  • Mahesh Patil
    Jun 16, 2012 - 10:42PM

    LOL.What a investigation at the cost of tax payers’ money.

    Recommend

  • romeo
    Jun 16, 2012 - 10:44PM

    yeh to hona hi tha

    Recommend

  • Ali Rizvi
    Jun 16, 2012 - 10:48PM

    Yes! I’m going to confess it today. I told Haqqani to draft and send the memo to Mike Mullen.

    Recommend

  • Max
    Jun 16, 2012 - 10:50PM

    Yes! he was only pulling the strings from behind. The puppets knew how to dance.

    Recommend

  • Sky
    Jun 16, 2012 - 10:56PM

    The question is . Will he brought to justice. He caused enough turmoil in Pakistan. Does the SC only jail the poor and let go the PM and Haqqanis.

    Recommend

  • Zaikam
    Jun 16, 2012 - 10:56PM

    Really? What an angel that man is now.

    Recommend

  • Imran Con
    Jun 16, 2012 - 11:03PM

    What a bunch of incompetents. Haqqani doesn’t have the authority to grant the things in the memo. If you’re going to say he wrote it, you can’t say a higher up isn’t involved as well.

    Recommend

  • Ordinary Villager
    Jun 16, 2012 - 11:04PM

    Please stop giving importance to these types of Jokers. We have many problems apart from that. The Nation as whole is sick and tired of these types of news. Resolving mysteries in these cases will not help us in eradicating poverty, hunger or bad governance. Neither it will help in good law and order situation or improvement of economy or an end to loadshedding. So please focus on them and dump these types of news and dont give importance to these petty news at all.

    Recommend

  • Mirza
    Jun 16, 2012 - 11:16PM

    Mansoor Ijaz said “According to Ijaz the memorandum had the support of President Zardari”. The commission found MI’s claim as baseless or lie. Yet MI was their only witness against HH and on that basis the commission found HH guilty, yet part of his claims were lies!
    It is an open secret that generals were not happy with HH and they wanted to do anything to remove him. The compromise would have been to remove HH but not topple the govt. MI has been open enemy of Pakistan, army, ISI and have been spitting venom against it for many years. Yet the only part of his writings that was against HH is taken as the truth not ISI trying to topple the govt and other serious charges.

    Recommend

  • Khurram
    Jun 16, 2012 - 11:19PM

    Does this mean Red Warrants for Hussain Haqqani?

    Recommend

  • Cautious
    Jun 16, 2012 - 11:39PM

    So the person who likely had personal access to the entire American hierarchy decided on his own to write an amateurish memo and pick a dubious character to deliver it — all on his own. Seems to me that Haqqani probably had the greatest insight into how American’s think and if he was the driving force behind this affair would have had enough common sense (and discretion) to communicate the message in person and not put anything in writing. This entire event has been handled in an oafish matter.

    Recommend

  • Faheem
    Jun 17, 2012 - 12:15AM

    You mean it was a “single hand operation” by HH. What a joke! Memogate Commission was all waste of time, energies and our tax-money.

    Recommend

  • usman
    Jun 17, 2012 - 12:27AM

    The connection could have been established, had he handed over the BBM’s.

    Recommend

  • Ammar
    Jun 17, 2012 - 2:27AM

    This Report is rubbish, just like the MEMO.

    Recommend

  • Saqibtahir
    Jun 17, 2012 - 3:02AM

    Very disappointing for the ghairat brigade.

    Recommend

  • SM
    Jun 17, 2012 - 3:42AM

    What kind of impartiality is this? Mansoor was given an opportunity to record his statement via video link, Haqqani was not. Why can’t our judges be impartial?

    Recommend

  • Pashtun voice
    Jun 17, 2012 - 5:19AM

    This whole memogate affair is a joke. I don’t understand why HH needed to write a memo to Mullen? He knows Mullen personally and could have just picked up the phone or could just have told him personally. Such a serious issue is not communicated via a memo.

    Furthermore, the timing of this memogate finding seem to coincide very well with the Arsalan case.

    Recommend

  • sim
    Jun 17, 2012 - 6:18AM

    read the complete memo commission report.. get your facts straight.. and then comment.. haqqani is a paki citizen.. ijaz is not.. the supreme court has the authority to call haqqani to pakistan and its haqqani’s duty to comply.. the SC does not have the authority to call ijaz.. ijaz recorded his statement via video link.. haqqani just delayed his return even when the SC recalled him for at least four times.. haqqani had vowed to the court that he’d return within four days whenever the court asks him to.. he never did that.. ijaz submitted his BB pin in january.. haqqani reluctantly submitted his BB pin in march.. 95 days after the messages were exchanged.. knowing that RIM keeps a backup for 90 days only.. haqqani stated that he lost both his BBs at the same time.. yet he didnt file complaint at the embassy.. and at the post he was at.. if he did lose the phones and didnt bother to even report.. this constitutes as gross negligence.. haqqani was given 2,000,000 dollar per year for 4 years and he didnt account where the funds were spent even when the court asked, citing non-existant rules that prohibited this disclosure.. haqqani chose ijaz to deliver the memo instead of delivering it himself to keep himself save in case of a fallout..

    he knows he’s been caught.. he knows all evidence points to him.. the court has called him back and its his civic duty to abide by the court’s decision.. but mark my words.. he will never come back to the country..

    Recommend

  • Zalim Singh
    Jun 17, 2012 - 8:41AM

    agreeRecommend

  • RS
    Jun 18, 2012 - 4:38AM

    Even for a second if it’s imagined that what commission says is true, than it point out the worse senerio n a dangerous example that a Ambassador of a country has balls to acts on his own taking this kind of step. Hope govt n courts won’t let this matter go just like this, final out come should be an examplanery so that no ambassador in future even dare to think crossing red line.

    Recommend

  • Naeem Khan ,Ks
    Jun 18, 2012 - 10:02PM

    One has to be pretty naive to think that Zardari was not involved, Hussain Haqqani could not have taken such a drastic and under handed task by himself. One should look into Haqqani past dealings The Court can’t and should not convict any one with out some solid evidence.Recommend

  • Jun 18, 2012 - 11:35PM

    There is no documentary evidence,
    and Mansoor Ijaz is not dependable witness .His credibility
    is doubtfull.

    Recommend

  • Jun 18, 2012 - 11:53PM

    Through video link,
    during the cross examination,
    his answers were confronted which created doubt
    Benefit of doubt always goes to accused.

    Recommend

  • Jun 18, 2012 - 11:59PM

    Huge time was wasted ,
    huge money was expanded,
    and result no more than zero.

    Recommend

  • Jun 19, 2012 - 12:24AM

    Cross-examination is tool,
    in the hand of defense counsel,
    by which he finds the facts from the mind of witness.

    Many occasion,star witness was derailed,his direction was
    set by the commission and accepted his demands,

    At last, they rightly or wrongly came to the conclusion and
    declared guilty but gained no majority support of the nation.

    Recommend

  • Ramzan
    Jun 19, 2012 - 10:25PM

    Hussain Haqqani is very right in this regard. History of court reveals that they have played such tactics time and again. Icing the cake, the comments of Memo Commission were also wondering, who gave commission authority to pass such harsh and non-sense remarks. I don’t know, where is our national dignity, where is the justice? When people like Mansoor Ijaz are presented as national savior, they are promoted as loyal to Pakistan, where does the dignity lie? Why we forget, that Mansoor Ijaz is the same person who hate mongered against important institution of the same country. Even during the proceeding of the case, one could get what would be the decision. The concessions and favors given to Ijaz had already disclosed the aims of Commission.Recommend

  • Tufail
    Jun 19, 2012 - 10:26PM

    Finally Memo Commission has given its verdict as expected against Hussain Haqqani. Does data of phone calls, facsimile transmission, verbal appearance through video conference and a lot of talks mean that Mansoor Ijaz is right? Would the commission like to tell that what are the sold evidences that were presented by Mansoor Ijaz and on the basis which HussainHaqqani has been declared guilty? Not a single document is signed by Hussain Haqqani. Mansoor Ijaz has admitted that he wrote the memo. Is it not biased and partial to declare someone guilty on the basis of verbal appearance only? Declaring someone insincere to country is not a joke, what about several politicians who constantly seek the help of foreign powers and allow them to meddle in political affairs of the country? Do they not fall under the same category?

    Recommend

More in Pakistan