Mark Siegel. PHOTO: FILE
American Journalist Mark Siegel, who is a key witness in the Benazir Bhutto murder case, has refused to come to Pakistan to record his statement before an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) citing security concerns.
An ATC on January 6 had directed Siegel, who was also a close friend and the speech writer of assassinated former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, to appear in person before the court as a prosecution witness against former president Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf.
According to an earlier statement of Siegel, which he had recorded before a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) under Section 161, Musharraf had threatened Benazir with “dire consequences” if she returned home before the 2008 elections.
Siegelalleged that Musharraf knew of the assassination plot and had personally ordered the destruction of evidence in the case.
Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) prosecutor Chaudhry Zulfiqar Ali on Monday informed ATC Special Judge Chaudhry Habibur Rehman that due to “security reasons” Siegel was reluctant to come to Pakistan to record his statement. “After receiving the court summons, he expressed security concerns and is reluctant to appear in person before the court. He prefers to record his statement via a video link,” said Zulfiqar.
However, Siegel did not specify what kind of threats he was anticipating if he appeared in person. The FIA prosecutor informed the court that Siegel expressed concern and said that in the current circumstances it is not possible to come to Pakistan to record his statement.
Meanwhile, the prosecutor submitted an application before the ATC under Article 164 of Qanoon-i-Shahadat 1984 (Evidence Law) seeking to record his statement through video links.
In his application, Zulfiqar maintained that since Siegel had now refused to come to Pakistan, he requested the court to record his statement through video link.
“There is a precedent in history [Mansoor Ejaz],” he said.
“Siegel is an important witness and it is essential to record his statement. If any witness refuses to come physically before the court, the practice of video link could be adopted in order to speed up the investigation,” he argued.
The court admitted his application and issued notices to respondents for January 18.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 8th, 2013.
COMMENTS (12)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Karim: Independent Judiciary? What a joke. Who let off Nawaz Sharif from the plane hijacking case? Independent judiciary?
The guy who was in the car in front of BB is not a prime witness because a white dude says he knows the truth. How very fortunate.
@ Syed Shah Absolutely correct.
@M Usama Kabbir: That was another time........now u have independent Judiciary, media and army far away from meddling in political affairs.
Mark Siegel was a hired PR man who was given millions of dollars in both governments of PPP. He was like a paid worker of BB but being an American he is being elevated as a super witness whose testimony would solve the case. By design $35m were wasted in calling a report from UN to divert the attention from real killers. Can Seigel provide answer to this question that if BB, after a safe and secure jalsa, had not raised her head from the jeep and gone home, what worth would be his revelation of Musharaf's involvement be in the eyes of law?
This is the level of the courts investigative skills. Unless this Westerner has evid3ence, his words are just hearsay and are easily dismissed in any competent court system.
Why is this Siegel guy being treated like he was an eye-witness to the whole event? What weight, if any, will his evidence carry? The prime beneficiaries of the murder wans to sway away the fingers pointing at them.
This is waste of time and resource of Pakistan. Justice System has seriously been damaged in vengeance, vendettas, personal delights and money making. The court should have concentrated on the crime and not politics. If PPP wants to take a political mileage out of the case, they can be exempted to an extent of showing their grief and concern; however the courts should not use the same case for politics between the big wigs of Judiciary and the General who happens to be on his left side for personal reasons known to all.
Predicting/sponsoring/encouraging families after families in our region has ruined the system nothing else,for this reason our destiny is in hands of foreigners through imposing favorites and still our people/voters are look at them to bring bright future for them,noway,and media also joins them by placing it as head line.
PPP Governments were dismissed twice in PPP Governments. What an Irony @Karim. People like you have such a simplistic view of events.
Speech Writer of BB is facing security threats in PPP Government. What an Irony!