MQM rejects ATC judgment
By Our Reporter

KARACHI, Aug 21: Muttahida Qaumi Movement on Saturday rejected the verdict given by the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) in the murder case of Union Texas employees and demanded retrial of all ATC cases in the Sessions Court to fulfil the requirements of justice.

The MQM also urged the Supreme Court to take up the five pending petitions and conduct hearing on day to day basis and stay further judgments by the ATCs.

Addressing a news conference at the Karachi Press Club, deputy convener of the MQM coordination committee, Senator Nasreen Jaleel, protested over the death sentence passed by the ATC to two of the accused in the murder case.

She alleged that the regime was using these courts for achieving its political objectives of crushing the political opponents.

The MQM senator said the judgment was a test of the superior judiciary because Pakistan's integrity would depend upon its judgment in the pending appeals against the judgments of the ATC courts.

She claimed that lie-detector tests by the American FBI on those who had been sentenced to death had proved negative, and that was the reason why the US government had not asked for their custody.

Senator Nasreen said that ATC was giving judgment on the basis of statements recorded under Section 164 by the police, despite Supreme Court's order to the contrary.

She claimed that the purpose of the verdict was to tarnish the image of the MQM.

She said the manner in which the regime was conducting trials in the ATC, people's confidence in the judicial system was eroding and demanded that the ATCs should be disbanded forthwith.

The MQM senator said she also met the US consulate official here and tried to present the case of human rights violations. She claimed that her point of view was heard by the official who told her: "We don't want to interfere in the judicial process."

Parliamentary leader of the MQM in the Sindh Assembly, Dr Farooq Sattar, termed the verdict as a "black chapter" in the judicial history of Pakistan.

He said that the "pseudo courts" had been constituted as an alternative to the extrajudicial killings.

Dr Sattar claimed that he had credible information that the American investigators had declared the two who were sentenced to death as innocent.

Dr Sattar said it was important because the issue involved legal points. He questioned as to how judgments could be passed by the courts set up under an ordinance which was valid for 120 days but had been made effective with retrospective effect although it had not been approved by the National Assembly or the Senate.

"What will be the consequences when the ordinance lapsed on August 26," he asked adding that it was a big test of the judiciary because the people were not satisfied with the manner the regime was dispensing "justice" through the ATCs.

Dr Sattar said that it was necessary to remove the Constitutional lacune. He alleged that Dr Saeeduz Zaman who had operated upon one of the accused, Ahmed Saeed, was abducted by the police official incharge of the investigation. He claimed that Ch. Aslam had allegedly threatened the surgeon of dire consequences if he made the "truthful statement in the ATC".

He alleged that the doctor was detained in the Gulshan-i-Iqbal police station and was terrorised.

Dr Farooq Sattar also pointed at, what he called, contradictions in the positions taken by the prosecution in the case.

He said that the police had claimed that it had recorded statements of three witnesses of the incident of Nov 12, 1997 on Nov 14. They were identified as Sherdil, a tanker owner, Mushtaq, his driver, and Fareed, his cleaner.

He said that disclosure by the police had come all of a sudden, that the aforesaid witnesses had appeared immediately after the murder and recorded their statements. "There is no such proof of the aforesaid statement in the office records of the SSP (West) and also in the police head office," claimed Dr Sattar.

He pointed out that in January 1999 an interim challan and again in March a final challan was presented and in both the challans there was no mention of any such statement.

The IO in the case, Malik Ehsan, the then SHO of TPX, was presently out of the country, and the statements of the above witnesses, which bear the signatures of Malik Ehsan, did not tally with the original and were thus forged signatures.