There seems to be a problem with Mr Naqvi’s line of argument with regards to the non-legal aspect of the memo case.
LONDON: There seems to be a problem with Mr Naqvi’s line of argument with regards to the non-legal aspect of the memo case. If according to him, the crux of the argument is Asma Jahangir’s concession, if the memo is true, then it constitutes the occurrence of a crime committed by Husain Haqqani, then there is a crucial follow-up question that needs to be answered. What aspect of the memo constitutes a crime? Is it the contents of the memo or the surreptitious nature of its existence?
As has been quite forcefully argued by some columnists, in either case it is hypocritical of the courts to argue that it constitutes a crime when a civilian government takes such a step, given that such questions are not asked when similar actions are taken by the military or its intelligence services. Part of the uproar has to do with the perception that the courts have grown increasingly partisan. A concurrent example is that while the courts are willing to prosecute the civilian government over the NRO case, they do not question which constitutional or legal authority was exercised by General Pervez Musharraf to provide indemnity through the NRO.
Naveed Ejaz
Published in The Express Tribune, January 11th, 2012.
