Memogate matters

The whole thing seems to be turning into something of a farce. The case seems to be getting nowhere at all.


Editorial February 23, 2012

As the half-forgotten memogate case lingers on, the main player in the saga, Manoor Ijaz has begun giving his testimony — through a video link —before a judicial commission in London. This complexity in itself demonstrates the complications inherent in a case that, for now, seems to be heading nowhere at all.

The testimony was heard by the head of the commission, the Chief Justice of the Balochistan High Court, Justice Qazi Faez Isa and two other high court judges. Ijaz told them during the unusually long-distance proceedings that he had been asked by Husain Haqqani to convey to the then head of the US military that attacks would be launched on key al Qaeda targets in Pakistan if the COAS and DG-ISI were asked to step aside. Ijaz further claims that the US wished to have such an offer made from a source higher than Haqqani himself while the latter chose to use Ijaz because his role could easily be denied. Other claims of a willingness on the part of the Pakistan government to nail the culprits named by India in the 2008 Mumbai attacks also came up.

Essentially, the whole thing was at best chaotic. Ijaz proceeded to read out all kinds of messages from his BlackBerry phone which he said gave credence to his testimony. The judicial commission was also told that the BlackBerry company had refused to retrieve data from the sets which may further offer a more authentic version of any conversation that took place between Ijaz and Haqqani.

The whole thing seems to be turning into something of a farce. The case seems to be getting nowhere at all. As analysts have pointed out, the military establishment and civilian government have turned to the US for ‘help’ many times since the memogate issue. We really have no way of knowing what happened this time around, especially if Mr Ijaz, the whistle-blower in this bizarre case should be believed at all, given that his statement was strongly contradicted by the ex-Pakistan envoy to Washington.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 24th, 2012.

COMMENTS (2)

SharifL | 12 years ago | Reply

I do not trust anybody, who at first did help Haqani to pass the message and then tries to demage the person he worked with. Ijaz is a doubtful character. He says civilian government should be strengthened and is in fact trying to weaken the civilian government. I suppose he wants 'another' civilian government to be strengthened. I know many Pakistanis who lie to prove their poltical ideology, Ijaz appears one such guy. It is shame that commision went to UK to listen to this character. There is something fishy which stinks.

John B | 12 years ago | Reply

Except the ex PAK envoy does not back up his claim with proof in this saga.

The editorial staff conveniently ignored several corroborating accounts of Ijaz testimony from Haqqani himself as well as ijaz's communication with Jones, and ijaz's law firms which advised him on the matter.

What would happen if tomorrow Ijaz's law firms issue a press statement corroborating his statement, under the penalty of disbarment.

Mr. Haqqani denies conversation ever took place which totally contradict what Ijaz has provided.

What is unknown and cannot be proven is if Mr. Zardhari knew of the details. It is time for Mr. Haqqani to come clean on the matter.

That said, did Mr. Haqqani do anything contradictory to his duties. No.

At the most Ijaz gave the PAK people a clear idea of PAK politics and the various power players involved for them to make an informed decision plus some day time drama for others.

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