Few, not all, security agency men involved in enforced disappearances: PHC

Court tells ISI, GHQ to thoroughly probe who is responsible in kidnapping and illegal detention of citizens.

Our Correspondent April 12, 2012

PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court took a softer tone on Thursday, saying some individuals and not all personnel of security agencies are involved in enforced disappearances.

Hearing various Habeas Corpus petitions filed by heirs of missing persons, which claim that security agencies are illegally detaining their relatives, the court asked the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency and the Pakistan Army’s General Headquarters to take notice of the matter and constitute a team to conduct an inquiry.

During the hearing, a PHC divisional bench headed by Chief Justice Dost Muhammad Khan was informed that one Mir Muhammad Arshad had reached home after he was kept in illegal detention for 38 months.

“He was released and wasn’t punished. Isn’t this the worst treatment? What kind of treatment do they [who picked up Arshad] deserve?” the chief justice questioned.

The chief justice said that the armed forces have offered countless sacrifices and continue to do so, asking senior official to thoroughly investigate the matter.

“It is more essential to bring those individuals [personnel of security agencies] under control and channelise their functions and if anyone defies orders [of senior officials of the armed forces] be court-martialled under the Army Act,” the chief justice ordered.

“The action should be taken at the earliest and must be visible to the public. A copy of the order should be sent to the ISI DG, federal defence secretary and chief of the armed forces,” the chief justice said.


ashok | 9 years ago | Reply

...and the rest are involved in torture and dumping the dead ones?

jan | 9 years ago | Reply

(reality) The chief justice said that the armed forces have offered countless sacrifices and continue to do so.

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


Most Read