Govt stands before this court clueless, spineless, IHC Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaque Khan remarks in Dr. Aafia Siddiqui case

ISLAMABAD, Sep 06 (SABAH): The government of Pakistan stands before this case clueless and spineless, remarked Islamabad High Court (IHC) Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaque Khan in the case of Dr. Fowzia Siddiqui, here.

As per details, the single bench of Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaque Khan of IHC heard the constitutional petition of Dr. Fowzia Siddiqui regarding the release of her sister Dr. Aafia Siddiqui.

Imran Shafique Advocate appeared before the court as counsel of the petitioner. The petitioner, Dr. Fowzia Siddiqui and Clive A. Stafford Smith appeared through a video link. Ms. Zainab Janjua, advocate/ amicus, Barrister Munawar Iqbal Duggal, Additional Attorney General along with Yasir Arfat Abbasi, AAG also appeared before the court.

Muhammad Syrus Sajjad Qazi, Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Umer Malik, Director USA, Fayyaz ul Haq, JS, Kh. Humail, SO (ITA), Ministry of Interior, Wajid Aziz Qureshi, Assistant Solicitor, Ministry of Law

Barrister Zahoor Ahmed, Legislative Advisor appeared before the court.

The court in its order said: Let it be recorded for the annals of the judicial history, for those coming later who might wish to learn how this case progressed over all the years, that the Government stands before this Court today spineless and clueless, despite this being the 3rd hearing on the point, and portraying its paranoia, couched in a bundle of platitudes, that it simply has no clue whatsoever as to what the filing of the amicus brief will entail for it, and all this is happening 12 days past the date the Ministry was informed of the critical role of the amicus brief vide Mr. Smith’s declaration, delivered on the 20th of August.

Twelve days later, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not been able to contact any external lawyers (which it appears they are in desperate need of because their in-house capacity is simply insufficient for them to advise on the legal ramifications of filing an amicus brief) and, after 12 days, they have produced the brilliant result of 12 days of backbreaking work, that consists in their discovery that they now need to write to a US lawyer to simply tell them what would happen if they were to file an amicus brief distancing the Government from the factual aspects of the brief and associating with the final relief prayed for, namely, that Dr. Aafia may be released.

With this pace of professional and Government support, we would be at the lost and lazy mercy of the Government if they were to be given any rein in the timeframe within which Mr. Smith is ready to file the Motion.

Let it be noted by all and sundry that today the Government has left Mr. Smith to proceed on an assumption alone that the Government might get its act together in time to be able to file the amicus brief.  So for now we have the foreign national Mr. Smith who, after much effort and expense, including going to Afghanistan, has put together a foundational basis for the proposed Motion for Compassionate Release, which, he believes, and has, through his numerous declarations on record, provided prima facie grounds for holding that belief, has reasonable prospects of being heard and granted.

On the other hand, we have Pakistani officials of the Government of Pakistan in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan and in the Attorney General of Pakistan’s office, but not a single voice of resolve is heard to say, yes, we would stand alongside Mr. Smith in that US Court and will support the prayer in the amicus brief for Aafia’s release on compassionate grounds.

Instead of agreeing in principle to file the amicus brief in terms of the draft shared with them, which appears utterly harmless in its tenor, the Government’s petrification is a pathetic sight.

Ms. Janjua’s submission implies that an order of the Court would be required for the Government to be moved by order rather than by initiative. Therefore, based on Mr. Duggal’s submissions, the order is passed that all prerequisites for the Government to make its decision whether or not it will sign the draft of the amicus brief shared with it, whether it requires an opinion of a US counsel, a huddle by the Secretaries to the Government, an emergent meeting of the Cabinet, and any green lighting from the ‘security agencies’, whatever it is, must all be completed and conveyed with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to Mr. Smith no later than 30.09.2024.

Because of the criticality of the Government’s amicus brief for the Motion for Compassionate Release, and because it appears to the Court that the Government’s is not quite appreciating what it is being asked for, let notice be issued to the learned Attorney General to appear himself on the next date, along with the learned Secretaries of the Federal Cabinet, Law & Justice Division, and the Defense Division.  If any of those gentlemen happen to be out of station on the next date, they shall make arrangements with the office to participate online. 

The next point (overlooked on the last date of hearing) was the Government standing by the Clemency Petition to be filed by Mr. Smith before the President of the United States within September. Mr. Smith and Ms. Janjua have emphasized that the Government of Pakistan standing by this Clemency Petition, and using whatever good offices they might be able to synchronously with the filing of the Clemency Petition, would be essential for the consideration of the Clemency Petition by the US President.

Mr. Smith states that he should be in a position to share the draft of the Clemency Petition towards the end of this week. Mr. Duggal commits, on inquiring by the Court, that the turnaround time for the Federal Government on the draft Clemency Petition, with its answer in ‘yes’ or ‘no’, would be 7 days from receipt of the draft by Mr. Duggal. Accordingly, Mr. Duggal is directed to revert with a firm ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer by the Government of Pakistan on the next date.

As for the prisoner transfer agreement, Mr. Duggal has reverted with instructions and, after hearing the submissions, it is ordered that the Ministry of Interior will complete its review with a report to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs within three weeks, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will, within one week thereafter, forward the draft PTA to the United States Government for its review and comments, that is, latest by 07.10.2024, concludes the order. The case was relisted on 13.09.2024.