Family of 'fake encounter' victim cries for justice

Victim's father demands security for his family; says he is being threatened by perpetrators 


Family of "fake encounter" victim protests. PHOTO: AFP

KARACHI: The family of Muhammad Maqsood, who was killed in an alleged encounter with the police on Sharae Faisal in January, has demanded that the names of persons involved in the incident be placed on the Exit Control List.

Maqsood's family also requested the government to provide security to them and other witnesses involved in the investigation. Accompanied by civil rights activist Jibran Nasir, who is representing the family, they made these demands at a press conference at the Karachi Press Club on Wednesday.

Benazir, the youngest sister of Maqsood, delivered an emotionally-charged cry for justice as tears rolled down her cheeks. "I can't see any hope from the government," she said, pleading to Chief Justice Saqib Nisar to take up the matter. "My brother was a simple person, who was killed in a fake encounter. We don't need anything other than justice," she added.

Another sister of the deceased, Tayyaba Zainab, said that since the incident, many government officials had visited their house and made symbolic gestures of placing their hands over their heads, but to no avail. "No one actually cares because several months have passed since the incident and the perpetrators are now trying various tactics to escape justice."

Maqsood's father, Sher Muhammad, said his son was the only bread winner of the family and had left behind five sisters and parents, when he was brutally killed by black sheep in the police department. He added that those involved in the encounter were now threatening to do the same to him.

The encounter

On January 20, the 27-year-old Maqsood was shot dead near the Pakistan Air Force base on Sharae Faisal. He was a tailor by profession. The police party involved in the incident had initially claimed he was a criminal and was killed during a shoot-out.

A few hours after the incident, the police had retracted their initial statement and issued another one, claiming that an 'innocent' citizen was killed in an exchange of fire between a suspect and the police.

They claimed that two suspects, Ali and Babar, had been arrested in an injured condition while their accomplice, Ibrahim, had managed to escape. According to the new statement, the suspects were involved in several cases of mobile snatching. Later, Babar had succumbed to his injuries.

CCTV footage says otherwise

The real controversy was stirred by the CCTV footage of the incident, which showed the policemen shooting Maqsood on the pretext of an encounter.

In the footage recorded at around 6am, a police mobile was seen following a rickshaw, which overturned after the police opened fire. Later, the police team, led by Assistant Sub-Inspector Tariq, lined some of the commuters on the footpath and shot them. The ASI then turned to Maqsood, who was still seated in the rickshaw and shot him multiple times at close range.

No reforms

Lawyer Jibran Nasir said during the press conference that the malicious and nefarious designs of the police could be seen in the fake encounter as they killed an innocent person and put the blame on petty thieves. "The police department declared the entire incident as a justified encounter, fearing backlash in the wake of the Naqeebullah and Intizaar murder cases," he said.

For Nasir, it was immoral of politicians to negotiate with victims behind closed doors and try to manipulate the proceedings by offering pittance to the poor families.

Referring to Home Minister Sohail Anwar Siyal's visit to the deceased's family home in March, Nasir said the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leader had not followed through on his commitment. "How many more fake encounters of Naqeebullah, Intizar and Maqsood will have to take place before reforms are brought into place?" Nasir questioned.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ