Missing individual: Police cannot proceed against army men, states MI
Attorney tells Supreme Court Army Act gives cover to military personnel.
Attorney tells Supreme Court Army Act gives cover to military personnel. PHOTO: AFP
ISLAMABAD:
Military Intelligence (MI), a premier spy agency of the country, on Tuesday informed the Supreme Court that neither the court nor the police could proceed against any persons subject to army laws.
In a written statement submitted in the apex court hearing the case of a missing person, the secret agency through its lawyer Raja Ibrahim Satti maintained that an action against military personnel could only be taken under Pakistan Army Act 1952.
“This court, as well as, the police have no jurisdiction in respect of a person, who is subject to Pakistan Army Act as admittedly in the present case the proceedings are against Major Haider of MI,” advocate Satti argued in the written reply.
According to the details, Abida Malik had filed an application with the SC requesting for the recovery of her husband Tasif Ali alias Danish, who was allegedly picked up by a Major Haider two years ago.
In the reply, the MI said Abida earlier approached the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench for recovery of her husband; but the high court returned her petition saying it could not hear a case against army personnel.
Following dismissal of her petition she approached the SC with an application to become party in the pending cases of missing persons.
On May 7, 2013 Sadiqabad Police in Rawalpindi registered a criminal case about the disappearance of Tasif and started searching for the missing man. In their effort, the police recently visited Mirpur Cantonment and approached the MI directorate to find out the whereabouts of Major Haider.
The MI lawyer maintained that there was no major named Haider in Mirpur and no MI personnel involved in the abduction of Tasif Ali.
“Since the Pakistan Army Act 1952 is protected under Article 8(3) of the Constitution and none of its provisions can be declared void being inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights,” advocate Satti has maintained in his written reply. The MI prayed the court to reject the application of Abida Malik.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 12th, 2013.
Military Intelligence (MI), a premier spy agency of the country, on Tuesday informed the Supreme Court that neither the court nor the police could proceed against any persons subject to army laws.
In a written statement submitted in the apex court hearing the case of a missing person, the secret agency through its lawyer Raja Ibrahim Satti maintained that an action against military personnel could only be taken under Pakistan Army Act 1952.
“This court, as well as, the police have no jurisdiction in respect of a person, who is subject to Pakistan Army Act as admittedly in the present case the proceedings are against Major Haider of MI,” advocate Satti argued in the written reply.
According to the details, Abida Malik had filed an application with the SC requesting for the recovery of her husband Tasif Ali alias Danish, who was allegedly picked up by a Major Haider two years ago.
In the reply, the MI said Abida earlier approached the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench for recovery of her husband; but the high court returned her petition saying it could not hear a case against army personnel.
Following dismissal of her petition she approached the SC with an application to become party in the pending cases of missing persons.
On May 7, 2013 Sadiqabad Police in Rawalpindi registered a criminal case about the disappearance of Tasif and started searching for the missing man. In their effort, the police recently visited Mirpur Cantonment and approached the MI directorate to find out the whereabouts of Major Haider.
The MI lawyer maintained that there was no major named Haider in Mirpur and no MI personnel involved in the abduction of Tasif Ali.
“Since the Pakistan Army Act 1952 is protected under Article 8(3) of the Constitution and none of its provisions can be declared void being inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights,” advocate Satti has maintained in his written reply. The MI prayed the court to reject the application of Abida Malik.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 12th, 2013.