Shakil Afridi case: FATA lawyers decline legal support

Published: May 27, 2012
Amn Tehreek chief says that copy of power of attorney still not received. PHOTO: AFP/FILE

Amn Tehreek chief says that copy of power of attorney still not received. PHOTO: AFP/FILE


In the aftermath of the sentencing of Dr Shakil Afridi, another twist emerged on Saturday when the Fata Lawyers Forum (FLF) refused to extend any legal help to the former government surgeon.

Members of Aman Tehreek and some Fata lawyers had earlier submitted an application at the Peshawar Central Jail, seeking Afridi’s approval for power of attorney.

However, on Saturday, FLF lawyers issued a statement whereby they refused to offer any legal support to Afridi.

“No one has approached the FLF for any legal advice while the body’s executive committee and the cabinet are unaware of anyone seeking counsel,” the statement highlighted.

When contacted, FLF President Ijaz Mohmand also denied that the body was in any way associated with the case.

On the other hand, Aman Tehreek leader Idrees Kamal maintained that a panel of lawyers including the FLF president was helping the body to defend Afridi in the court.

“We still await the signed copy of the power of attorney as well as the copy of the case itself from the political administration,” said Kamal.

“Some FNF lawyers are helping us in their personal capacities,” he added.

When approached, former Security Secretary Fata Brigadier (retd) Memood Shah said that Afridi’s sentence was first pronounced by a tribal jirga, comprising elders well-versed in tribal norms and traditions.  An appeal against the decision can be made to the Appellate Commissioner Court (ACC) as outlined in the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR), added Shah.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 27th, 2012.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (12)

  • Ashiq Hussain
    May 27, 2012 - 10:06AM

    Pakistan government also made claim that lead to OBL was provided by them…Would we see sentence against them for helping CIA? or only Shakeel Afridi was the culprit


  • May 27, 2012 - 10:54AM

    Awami Tehreek is a Bird of Paradise that suddenly flew in from somewhere in Pakistan or Papua New Guinea. Is it resident in Sindh, KP, Baluchistan, or Punjab? However, it is being heard chirping in Karachi, Nawabshah, and now KP.

    What is the murky and insidious story of OBL and Dr. Shakeel Afridi, we will Inshallah come to know only from a foreign news channel.

    Salams to Pakistan.


  • Ali Mehdi
    May 27, 2012 - 1:31PM

    Why this cry against Mr. Shakil.

    He was a CIA agent, running a fake vaccination program….
    Local bodies mentioned that he bought sub-standard vaccination from KPK pharmacies and gave that under USAID program….
    He provided medicines which was only to collect the samples…

    The charge against him is not OBL, its undercover spy. Shame on Shakil and the persons like him those who are working against their motherland. These guys should be executed immediately as a lesson.

    And interestingly the Imam of one of the masjid nearby left the town during the night of operation.
    Why CIA didnt inform Shakil to left. They leaked his information to show Pakistani counterparts that we dont need people from outside, we can easily find traitors from your country. CIA deliberately leaked information about him


  • Basit
    May 27, 2012 - 1:58PM

    @Ashiq Hussain:
    Providing evidence against OBL by Pakistani official agencies is done through intelligence sharing operation and not through fake vaccination campaigns that endanger the lives of children and without informing your own government go against all legal and moral laws. Is the difference simple enough for our liberals to understand?


  • Mullah Ka Bacha
    May 27, 2012 - 3:07PM

    Pathetic state of affairs in a country where anyone who tries to stamp out terrorism is an outcast and those who commit terrorism are heroes – this is why Pakistan is the laughing stock of the world


  • Jibran
    May 27, 2012 - 6:57PM

    @Ali Mehdi:
    What has he done against the motherland? Has he brought more harm than the mullahs with hijaabs, qadris, hafiz saeeds, jhangvis? If you think so, we know which side you are on.


  • anwar
    May 27, 2012 - 8:01PM

    How is this case different from aafia siddiqi case in NY?


  • Imran Con
    May 27, 2012 - 8:54PM

    Will you guys stop making things up? He didn’t endanger anyone. They were real vaccines. The same ones used by other doctors in Pakistan.
    You can’t demonize the man on that aspect and still look like the rest of what you say is trustworthy and rational too.

    I repeat, hoping I’m not using too big of words for everyone who has made this claim: He was a licensed physician who had the authority to administer the very real and commonly used vaccines and did the same thing that day as any other doctor on any given day. He did exactly all he claimed he was doing medically. He didn’t lie to anyone. He didn’t bring even a 1% chance of harm upon those he was treating that isn’t there when any other doctor gives vaccines to people. The only thing that sets him apart is the part where he went to Osama’s expected location, still doing his normal job with the addition of intending to test those specific peoples DNA. The other people he gave the vaccines to were not even subjected to the DNA testing aspect. It was isolated to the suspected people in his compound. The other people were treated normally.

    There’s no nicer way to say it: if you rely on that reasoning you absolutely, 100%, have to be stupid. You think the world should trust your judgment when you spout such nonsense as fact? If anything it makes people all the more certain he didn’t get a fair trial and they barely took the actual details of the event into consideration when making a judgment.


  • Pollack
    May 27, 2012 - 11:34PM

    The lawyers threw rose petals for killer quadri but no help for this guy who helped catch Osama. Pakistan is a strange place.


  • Hairaan
    May 27, 2012 - 11:41PM

    @Ashiq Hussain:
    Looks you do not have an iota of the common sense. Man there is no problem when governments collaborate with governments (on any issue). Its an individual collaborating a foreign government that’s against the law.


  • Muhammad Zubair
    May 28, 2012 - 12:47AM

    One can understand why FATA lawyers declined to represent him in the courts just a day before they avowed to defend him. It must have been the job of notorious ISI that made them change their mind. It is very heart sickening to hear educated Pakistanis condemning Dr. Shakeel Afridi as a traitor. He is a hero for Pushtuns who have suffered the brunt of Al-Qaeda more than any other ethnic group of Pakistan. Those who condemn him because he played his role for money must also then condemn the Pakistan military which sold terrorists (and many of them innocent civilians) to Americans for as low as 5000 $ (In the Line of Fire: Musharraf). When the ISI does it, its ok but if Dr. Shakeel does it, it is treason. What a contradiction. I am not concerned with his motive but the result of his act. He helped in eliminating a person who hands were tainted with the blood of thousands of Pakistanis killed indiscriminately in market places, janazas, jirgas, worship places etc over the last decade. It is also very funny that Dr. Shakeel is accused waging war against Pakistan by helping the CIA locate OBL!!!! Is OBL equivalent to the state of Pakistan? Those who criticize him for not taking ISI on board, must keep in mind that ISI has all along being in bed with the OBLs, Haqqanis and other terrorists / the so-called strategic assets. Well done Afridi. We Pushtuns are thankful to you.


  • Mirza
    May 28, 2012 - 8:33AM

    You said “How is this case different from aafia siddiqi case in NY?”
    The main difference is Dr. Afridi was not hurting or trying to kill anybody especially innocent civilians and had no connection with known terrorists. He has no such charge that he was a physical threat to anybody. On the other hand Dr. Afia has serious charges (I am not saying right or wrong it is the open legal system to decide) of terrorist acts. She was related to Khalid Sheikh and contacts with known terrorists. In addition she was tried in an open court with the facility of his lawyer if she desired. Afridi did not have that luxury.


More in K-P