The production of illegally detained,suspected terrorists in the Supreme Court should have been met with asense of triumph. Instead, the last month has seen families ofmissing persons, who have joined the Amna Janjua led missingpersonscampas sympathisers with terrorists and militants.Those who have hailed the Supreme Courts actions have been accused ofneglecting the memory of the victims of terrorism and their families.
Things have changed quite swiftly overthe past few months. Then, everyone seemed content with denying thatanyone was actually “missing” or that the military andintelligence agencies had anything to do with their disappearance.
Today, many argue, quite openly thatour intelligence agencies only “pick up” the guilty and if theydo so, so what? After all its in the national interest!
A letter to theeditorinthispapersummarised the prevalent sentiment as follows:
And there areinstances when thosearrested have been foundto be involved inattacks on members ofthe armed forces, militaryinstallations and onbuildings owned byintelligence agencies. Insuch instances, cases werefiled in the courtsbut those accused wereacquitted.
It appears guilt is determined by theinstitutional affiliation of the accuser rather than the presumedactions of the accused.
A common criticism is that the courtsand judges are incompetent or scared, or worse both. They areunwilling or unable to prosecute cases involving those accused ofterrorism and are in majority of cases acquitted. Further, evidence gathered by extra judicial means cannot be submitted in court, further hampering the prosecutions case.
However, is thesolution to limited judicial capacity extra judicial murder andtorture? Or is the provision of resources and improvements in thelaw, to convict criminals properly, a better long term solution?
Another line of criticism against thosewho have question the policy of enforced disappearances includes thesentiment that:
Instead of trying to understand thisissue, our media does the opposite and makes a hue and cry over this,and in the end the terrorists benefit. This also lowers the morale ofour armed forces who feel that while they are risking their lives tofight the militants, society in general is placing greater value onthe rights of the militants.
I find it quiteinsulting that people believe that extra judicial actions; which areillegal according to the law of the land, which military personnelhave taken an oath to uphold, will somehow improve the morale of thearmed forces.
I assume thatmembers of the armed forces are serving to uphold the law of theland, which clearly protects the rights of even the worst amongst us.Those who say that we should recall the sacrifices of our soldierswho are fighting terrorism by looking the other way while illegaldisappearances continue do no service to the memory of the bravemembers of our armed forces.
Perhaps the worstinterpretation of the judicial proceedings is the perception of the“rights of terrorists”, as if this is something that the SupremeCourt has decided to bestow upon them. They are no rights “for”terrorists, these rights are universal and applicable upon allPakistani citizens that cannot and should not be selectively applied.
Have we notcriticised the United States for its confinement of detainees inGuantanamo bay and their policy of extraordinary rendition for thevery same reasons? Do we not highlight the arbitrary confinement ofPalestinians by Israel and Indian forces in Kashmir, accusing them ofthe very same acts that we justify domestically?
No one iscampaigning for the guilty to be released unpunished. Theconstitution which enshrines certain rights to even murderers,rapists and terrorists, also aims to ensure that these very peopleface the full force of the law. That people arrested are dulyprocessed, with their families made aware of their whereabouts andgranted access to legal representation, does not diminish the statesability to hold them to account.
We as a nationshould consider whether the memories of those who are victims ofterrorism is honoured by brutal, illegal violence. Or do we as anation rise above the actions of cowards and apply the law in wordand spirit?
Unfortunately, weappear seduced by the appeal of raw and bloody justice, deliveredswiftly, rather than making the effort to implement the harddecisions required to build the capacity of law enforcement and thejudiciary.
Syndicated from: A Liberal Facist Beghairat Mind
