You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
India-Pakistan
Punjab claims to have 'confidential evidence' against Hafiz Saeed
2009-07-14
The Supreme Court (SC) was informed on Monday the Punjab government had challenged the release of Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed due to certain "confidential evidence" against him.

Punjab Advocate General (AG) Muhammad Raza Farooq told the three-member bench hearing pleas against a Lahore High Court (LHC) decision to release Saeed and Colonel (r) Nazir Ahmed that Saeed was detained under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance 1961. However, Section 3 was not mentioned in the detention order. The three-member bench, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Muhammad Sair Ali and Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, asked the AG to satisfy it (SC) on all points. The AG said there was sufficient evidence against Saeed, but it could not be made part of the case record because it was confidential.

Binding on govt: Farooq also submitted that it was binding on the government to implement resolutions adopted by the UN. He said the detention of Saeed had become necessary, as the UN had levelled allegations that Saeed was linked to Al Qaeda and was allegedly involved in some terror-related incidents at an international level.

"You cannot curtail the liberty of any person," the CJP added. The court then also asked Deputy Attorney General Shah Khawar to argue his case, however he told the court that he wanted to argue the case on Tuesday. The court accepted the request and adjourned the hearing until Tuesday (today).

The federation and the Punjab government, through their petitions, requested the court to set aside the LHC decision of ending the detention of Saeed and Col (r) Nazir Ahmed. The petitions claimed the LHC had not considered the sensitivity of the case, especially in light of the prevailing security situation.
Posted by:Fred

00:00