About Aafia: Respect the Law

Respect the Law

2011-01-30T04:26:00.004+05:00

On Thursday, 27th, an American shot down two motorcyclists in Lahore, while another car apparently connected with the same overran a civilian within minutes. The one who had shot the motorcyclists escaped from the scene but was chased by the traffic police and arrested. He was identified as Raymond David, an American who had once been intercepted while trying to enter the cantonment with a weapon (which diplomats are not usually supposed to carry).

The law minister promised the people that access will also be gained to the driver of the other car by the next evening. This did not happen.

In Washington, the State Department announced that the person arrested was a diplomat but the name given by the media was not correct. Following this, the media soon changed the name to Raymond Davis (hopefully getting it correct this time?).

The next day, the police got a six-day remand of Davis from the court. He pleaded self-defense. However, the autopsy reports showed that the victim who died on the spot had received four bullet wounds, the one who died in the hospital had received three, and the one ran down by the other car died of head injuries.

The following day, the US embassy demanded Davis' immediate release under diplomatic immunity. This was turned down by the Pakistani government since the issue was sub-judice and the embassy was asked to present its argument in the court. In the meanwhile, the Supreme Court chief justice Javed Iqbal ordered that Davis should not be allowed to leave the country.

Incidentally, this development has occured at a time when the Supreme Court had given hint that it would press criminal charges against officials involved in the abduction of the "missing persons". On separate charges of corruption, the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) had started investigations against its own chief on orders from the Supreme Court. Hence, there is a high expectation in the public that the law of the land would be upheld even against odds.

The unfortunate debacle created over the case of Aasia Bibi has also had a sobering effect (to put it mildly). It seems that a tactical mistake committed by some, including the late Governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer, was that in their zeal to support an accused whom they perceived as underdog, they went ahead to question the very law under which the accused was being tried. In some ways, this created a situation where two messages got mixed up: "Free Aasia Bibi" and "Never mind the law of the land." The public outrage against this is well-known.

"Respect the law, and trust the judiciary to dispense justice." This is the noblest and, arguably, the safest approach for those who can influence public opinion in the case of Raymond Davis in Pakistan, US or elsewhere. Pakistan and US are allies, and both are facing many difficulties at the moment. Falling back on an ideal that ought to be equally dear to all civilized societies can be a good way of responding to this latest crisis.

Aafia Sentenced: What Next?

2010-09-24T06:32:00.001+05:00

Judge Richard Burman has sentenced Dr. Aafia Siddiqui to 86 years in prison. According to the report in Dawn, Dr. Siddiqui said to the audience after hearing the sentence, “Don’t get angry. Forgive Judge Berman.” Judge Berman repartee, apparently in scorn and sarcasm, was, “I wish more defendants would feel the way that you do.”

Nobody can say what implications this sentence carries for the world, US or Pakistan. A few things may be stated without fear of being contradicted though.

Before the common people in Pakistan and US even became aware of the existence of Aafia, she had already become well-known to human rights activists across the world as victim of abduction, rape and torture, whose minor children had also got abducted along with her. Pakistani, Afghan and US authorities were the accused in this case.

This was the world opinion in general. Since August 2008, the American media has been considerably successful in giving a different color to the story, alleging that Aafia had ties with al-Qaeda (a charge that was never brought up in the court at any point).

The power of mass media is itself its limitation: the news of tomorrow is bound to wipe out the news of today. Therefore with the passage of time, the world opinion viewing Aafia as a victim is likely to prevail over the perception created by the American media.

For US, the consequences could be disastrous in the long-term because nobody can say how its legal system is likely to be judged once the world opinion about Aafia prevails over the American media version.

For Pakistan, two implications have already been carved in stone. The heyday of liberal and progressive human rights activists like Aasma Jahangir is over and it is unlikely that they will ever regain the prestige they used to enjoy in the past. Their credibility as well as integrity has received a serious blow since it is perceived by many that these activists didn’t do as much as they should have done in this case, and that this was not procrastination but selfish interest on their part.

The same goes for the government of Pakistan. This government seems to be overlooking that the last round of troubles began for President Pervez Musharraf over the issue of “missing persons” and the demand for his impeachment gained support in the wake of the discovery of Aafia in July 2008. The present regime may have made a mistake by failing to behave any differently than Musharraf in this matter.

Last, but not the least, there is an implication for Muslims in general. In Verses 84-85 of Surah Baqarah (Chapter 2), God criticizes certain people because they banish some among themselves from homes and assist the enemies against them in transgression. The question likely to haunt Muslims, especially in Pakistan, is whether their own behavior in the case of Aafia in particular and the missing persons in general is any different from those whom God has cursed.

Senate body for US envoy’s cooperation

2010-05-27T13:00:00.002+05:00

from Pakistan Observer

Islamabad—The Senate Standing Committee on Interior on Tuesday directed the Foreign Ministry to contact US ambassador seeking her cooperation on Dr. Aafia Siddiqui’s case and submit report on the details of expenditures of Rs 2 millions allocated for hearing of the case.

Senate panel asked Foreign Ministry to take immediate steps for early release and repatriation of Pakistani prisoners held in jails of various countries.

The panel of lawmakers urged Interior Ministry and local administration to remove hurdles erected at roads and streets as well as to take necessary steps for early transfer of foreign diplomatic missions from residential areas to Diplomatic Enclave.

The Senate body met under the chairmanship of Senator Talha Mehmood here while Senators Jamal Leghari, Almas Parveen, Tariq Azeem, Najma Hameed and Gulshan Saeed along with Minister of State for Interior Tasnim Qureshi and officials from Foreign and Interior Ministry attended the meeting.

Briefing committee about the current state of case of Dr Aafia Siddiqui Special Secretary Foreign Office while briefing the committee said that the US court had established seven charges against Dr Aafia Siddiqui and she could be awarded with 30 years imprisonment in case allegations would be proved.

“Dr Aafia was advised to issue statements before the court through lawyer, but she refused and issued statement different from her lawyer”, Foreign Office representatives told the committee adding the hearing of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui’s case had been adjourned by June on the appeal of her mother. He said that under the American law no prisoner could appeal for mercy to President without completing half of sentence. On this the Chairman remarked that there were nine examples that the US President pardoned sentences of prisoners and sent them to their native countries.

Foreign Office representatives apprised the committee that no extradition of prisoners’ treaty was intact between Pakistan and the US and it would take a long time to get Dr. Aafia Siddiqui repatriated under the International laws and conventions.

Committee asked Foreign Ministry to direct Pakistani embassies and missions to cooperate with overseas Pakistanis to resolve their issues and problems.

The Senate body expressed serious concerns over the absence of Chief Commissioner Islamabad from the meeting and asked Interior Ministry to ensure his presence in the committee in the next meeting. Committee constituted a sub committee to visit different blocked streets and roads by foreign missions in the name of security situated in residential areas in the federal capital.

Minister of State on Interior expressed his ignorance about reported detention of four people from the federal capital on alleged connection with Faisal Shahzad the accused NY-T Square failed bomb plotter. The committee showed utmost displeasure and asked him to come before the committee well informed. Committee directed Foreign Office officials to avoid issuing irrational statements about Saif Rehman detained in Chile.

Faisal Shahzad: Accused of Terrorism

2010-05-09T04:53:00.002+05:00

Parts of the New Yok City's Times Square were evacuated when a car bomb was discovered on the night of May 1. Fifty-three hours later, a liberal Pakistani-American with an MBA degree from the US, Faisal Shahzad, was arrested just as he was leaving the country aboard a flight to Dubai (Right: Faisal Shahzad with his wife Huma Mian in a photograph from Mian's Orkut profile and circulated on the Internet by Associated Press).

Pakistani-American community felt embarassed. Time magazine and like-minded writers accused Pakistan of posing a permanent threat to world peace ('Beyond Times Square: the threat from Pakistan' was the heading of a piece from Bobby Ghosh in Time while Sadanand Dhume, author of My Friend the Fanatic: Travels with a Radical Islamist quickly contributed 'Why Pakistan Produces Jihadists' to Wall Street Journal).

However, it was interesting to note how quickly and seriously this time the incident sparked skepticism from circles outside the usual right-leaning Pakistanis themselves. Dhume's article reappeared on The Information Clearing House website with the caption 'Classic example of anti-Islamic Propaganda'. Gordon Duff, a war veteran wrote 'Times Square Bomb Hoax, Israeli Intel Group Shows Its Hand' for Veterans Today:

Who would have believed it? Only days after a warning of an Israeli 'false flag' bombing against the US 'in the works' a massive car bomb is discovered in Times Square! Better yet, though no intelligence organization in the world could discover anyone claiming responsibility for this embarrassing failure, SITE Intelligence, a group rumored as the 'voice of the Mossad' has placed the blame on the Pakistani Taliban.

Duff goes on to say that the Site Intelligence finds are "not only timely for Israel, when the world is focused on claims they have been planning a ‘dirty bomb’ attack to send the US to war against Iran, but always tend to support mysterious organizations run from the caves of the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region... With the signature of this bombing being so close to that of the 'crotch bombing,' an attack with Israeli fingerprints from Nigeria to Yemen to Amsterdam, the 'superfast' accusation against a Pakistani group was no surprise.”

Further Reading:

Karachi Airport

2010-03-13T01:45:00.005+05:00

As suggested in the caption of this blog, the scope of this blog is not restricted to the case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui but seeks to cover all implications of respecting the law for a safer world. The following post from my friend and activist Naeem Sadiq moved me very much and I am sharing it here along with the picture he has sent in his email.

"This picture shows a worker polishing the floor of Karachi airport arrival lounge entrance, at midnight on 11 March 2010. The chemicals used in the polishing compound are highly corrosive to skin and destroy the sole of your feet in a matter of few hours. The worker is performing this job with absolutely no foot protection. I have often asked such workers to show me the bottom of their feet, only to find that a few days of work leaves them completely sole-less and with deep open wounds. It is disgusting that the largest and the most modern international airport of Pakistan shows such complete lack of concern for the health and safety of the poor contract workers. This is not just inhuman but also criminal. Should not the soul-less Civil Aviation Authority be held responsible for this criminal behaviour?"

Prevent an Honour Killing

2010-03-11T01:41:00.005+05:00

A couple who married of their own choice in Balochistan are fearing for their lives especially on Thursday morning when they have to appear in the court. The news was released by TeethMaestro Blog with request to citizens for taking action, bringing it to the attention of media and approaching the authorities on behalf of that couple.

The following email, posted in a Pakistan activism mailing list by one of its members following up on the appeal, might be of interest to many. While we rightly criticize the law-enforcing authorities for their lapses, lets also give them due credit when they deserve it. Here is the text of the email:

OMG:
I am home this am and decided to make these phone calls to help this couple. It is unbelievable. First number is indeed IG office number in which they asked me that what couple needed protection.
They gave me home number for IG, whose person gave me direct cell number for DIG. DIG picked the phone on second bell. Listened to what I had to say, did not ignore my complaint. Was not aware of this couple. He suspects that couple is trying to get protection at a lower level and being tribal system and all, police themselves might be scared at certain level. DIG wants couple's phone number and contact number to protect them.
He also allowed me to share his phone number to people who might be able to text him info about the couple.
Have I died and gone to heaven or really a DIG in Pakistan gives his personal phone number to people to call him and contact him? Is Balochistan better than Punjab after all?
DIG sounded like a very enlightened, educated, responsible and really a great man and responded to my inquiry of taking phone calls from regular citizens with "I am paid for that". If this is a dream, do not wake me up!

You can read more about the case on TeethMaestro Blog and join the campaign. Let's hope that tomorrow's Pakistan will be a place to dream about.

Aafia convicted: the value of a human life

2010-02-04T05:36:00.007+05:00

Dr. Aaafia Siddiqui has been convicted, and the sentence may send her to prison for life. If so, Pakistan loses a human being but America loses the value of a human being. For one the pain would be greater and for the other, the loss.

On forums like Facebook, it is being declared a sad day. In Pakistan, the day has not arisen as yet. Let's hope that it is a peaceful day and the nation lives up to the ideal of abiding by the law, given to it by its founding father. Perhaps it would help to understand the reason of what hurts in this case. It would be ridiculous to dismiss the feelings of the agrieved as mere sentiment. Perhaps a better understanding will be in the interest of everyone, and here is a recap of points elaborated in the report Don't Blame the Victim, released from People's Resistance forum in late 2008 (see sidebar).

The basic stance was that in this case, a victim had been turned into the accused. There was not one allegation but four, and it may have been better if they had been addressed in the order in which they had appeared:

First allegation was brought against Aafia, long, long, long ago by US authorities that she had links with Al-Qaeda. This was never pursued by the US authorities.
Second allegation was by international human rights group, prior to July 17, 2008, that Aafia was being held in secret prison, was unlawfully abducted and sexually tortured, and that he children had been abducted. This needed to be addressed before moving on. This allegation was against the US and allied authorities, and the most serious of all because two of those children are still missing, and could be dead.
Third allegation was by US authorities that on July 17, 2008, Aafia was found to be in possession of some objectionable and dangerous material. This was, again, not brought up, so it can be dropped. But it was a counter-allegation by the "accused", which in this case was US authorities (and Afghan and Pakistani authorities too - i do not want to sound as if I am ignoring their alleged role in this matter, but since US authorities ended up having custody of the victim, the focus naturally shifts to them)
The fourth allegation was by US authorities that she fired at some US soldiers, etc. while she was being interrogated, after her alleged arrest in the event of #3. This is the only allegation on which Aafia has been tried. See, where it comes in the order?

There should be no violence. Rather, there should not even be the thought of violence. The way to avoid violent thoughts is to understand where we stand and to focus on the moral victories we have won recently. We are far from perfect, like everyone else. But like other decent nations, we too have set some golden precedents for the 21st Century: just last year the people of Pakistan won a heroic struggle for the restoration of judiciary. We may have made mistakes in the past but this is a new century and we seem to have arrived here before many others. Let's keep peace for the sake of living up to our better traditions, and leaving behind our worst.

We can also hope that the case has not been closed. Appeal can be made, and perhaps our own government can spring into action to use better diplomatic skills. Also remains, still unsolved, the question about two of the children of Aafia, who were said to have been abducted with her.

Ninth Day of the Trial

2010-01-29T11:45:00.003+05:00

The following is an update from One Heart for Peace, where more detailed reporting of the case and links are available:

She received an undergraduate degree from M.I.T. Dr. Aafia Siddiqui earned two graduate degrees from Brandeis University. This preliminary piece expresses my own inner response as well. I am so glad to find this: Faith, Courage, Determination in the saga of " USA vs. Aafia Siddiqui" Thank You: El-Hajj Mauri' Saalakhan.

Key: As we go into the NINTH day of the trial--lawyer Charles Swift reminded the judge, the prosecution and all in the courtroom, minus the jury that Dr. Siddiqui states clearly on record regarding her charge in Ghazni, Afghanistan: "If shells were found there, I don't know where they came from."

Passing of UN Declaration of Human Rights

2009-10-29T01:14:00.009+06:00

Did you know that Pakistan played an important role in the adoption of the Declaration of Human Rights by the UN (in the days of the first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan)? The following is an except from On My Own, the autobiography of Eleanor Roosevelt who led the process from 1946 to 1948.

In the initial vote in Committee 3 on presenting the Declaration to the Assembly, delegates from four Muslim countries abstained, explaining that they believed the article on religious freedom was contrary to the Koran.

This setback came at a critical time near the end of the Paris sessions but, fortunately, we consulted Sir Zafrulla Khan, the foreign minister of Pakistan, whose delegate on the Commission had abstained, and he courageously rose in the General Assembly to defend the Declaration. Since Pakistan was the largest Moslem nation involved his position was important.

“It is my opinion,” he declared, “that our Pakistan delegate has misinterpreted the Koran. I understand the Koran to say, ‘He who can believe shall believe; he who cannot believe shall disbelieve; the only unforgivable sin is to be a hypocrite.’ I shall vote for acceptance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

In the end there was no vote against the Declaration in the General Assembly, but there were some disappointing abstentions. The Soviet Union and its satellite countries abstained, since the Russian delegates contended that the Declaration put emphasis mainly on “eighteenth century rights” and not enough on economic, social and cultural rights. The delegate from Saudi Arabia, Jamil M. Baroody, abstained, saying that he was quite sure King Ibn Saud would not agree with Sir Zafrulla in interpreting the Koran. South Africa also abstained, I was sad to note; its delegate said that they hoped to give their people basic human rights, but that the Declaration went too far. Two small countries were absent. The Declaration was finally accepted by the General Assembly on December 10, 1948.

The Devil's Parliament

2009-10-16T04:41:00.006+06:00

The last of the "long poems" by Iqbal is in Urdu, and it presents the poet's vision of the Devil's Parliament held in 1936. The speakers are the Devil and his five counsellors. In the conclusion, the Devil advises his counsellors to cultivate a fondness for theological debates and rituals among Muslims, so that they may never wake up to take a pragmatic view of the world.

Here is the concluding passage from the Devil's speech in translation by Muhammad Ashraf:

Whose cries of God is Most High could break the charm of the universe:
May the dark night of that God-thinking man not ever turn bright!
Is the Son of Mary dead or is he endowed with eternal life?
Are the Attributes of God separate from God, or do they form what He is?
Does the expected mean Jesus of Nazareth?
Or a Renewer, endowed with the attributes of the Son of Mary?
Are the letters of the Word of God New or of Old?
In which of the doctrines does the salvation of the Blessed Community lies?
Are not enough to the Faithful in this age:
These idols of worship carved by Metaphysical Theology?
Our safety lies in that Believer remains a slave till Doomsday:
Renouncing this transitory world for others’ sake.
What is good in his case is that poetry and mysticism
Which may keep hidden from his eyes the game of Life.
Every moment do I dread the awakening of this community
Whose religion is, in reality, nothing short of taking account of the universe.
Keep him well absorbed in the thought and contemplation of God in pre-morning hours:
Ye all make him grow stronger in his monastic disposition!

This post is a response to the distortion of religion by Etsko Schuitema on My Thoughts Blog

The tragedy of Gojar

2009-08-04T16:26:00.013+06:00

The world has heard about the tragedy of Gojar, a small village in Punjab (Pakistan). More than fifty houses of local Christian community were burnt and seven Christians lost their lives on Saturday, August 1.

Culprits believed that they need not respect the law and the state. They had heard that four Christians desecrated the Quran (which doesn't seem to be true now), but elders of both Christians and Muslims resolved the issue amicably. Then religious leaders incited the mobs, who were led by youth who covered their faces in veils.

The least we can do is to show respect to those who lost their lives. Let them not be passed over as mere “victims”. They were people, so let their names be remembered:

Hameed Maseeh (1959-2009)
Parveen (1959-2009)
Akhlas Maseeh (1969-2009)
Imamia Bibi (1987-2009)
Asia Bibi (1989-2009)
Asifa Bibi (1990-2009)
Musa (2002-09)

Read news story in Dawn

Aafia speaks in the court

2009-07-08T07:51:00.003+06:00

As a nation founded by one of the finest barristers, it should be the special mandate of the people of Pakistan to remind the world about the importance of law even if the rest of the world were to accept the norms of the jungle.

Last year on July 6, a British journalist broke the news that Dr. Aafia Siddiqui and her three minor children had been in the illegal secret custody of US authorities in Afghanistan for five years, and that Aafia had been subjected to rape and torture all this while. Exactly on the same date a year later, Judge Berman has conducted a hearing in a New York court where instead of being heard as a victim, Aafia is being tried as accused.

This Monday, Aafia was forced to appear in the court. “I am not a psychotic,” she told told the court which was trying to silence her. “I am sane, despite all your effort… I didn't shoot anybody… I am not against America – I never was. I am against the war… I am concerned for the lives that are being lost… I’m one of the very few people who have an insider’s view… I understand that there has been a misunderstanding. America as a nation has been framed to look bad.”

She shook her head in disagreement when the judge said that she was presumed innocent. As expected, Judge Burman didn’t rule on whether Aafia is fit to stand trial or not while the date of hearing has been shifted to October 19.

Read further details in Jawad Rasul: Inside Edition, the Sydney Morning Herald and Archives of the Republic of Rumi

Cairo matters

2009-06-04T17:41:00.008+06:00

When it comes to making bad allusions, nobody does it better than President Obama (reference to a previous post). In his widely televised speech in Cairo today, he illustrated the presence of Islam in the history of his country by mentioning that Morocco was the first to recognize the United States. It’s true, but more than a hundred year later the United States consented to the enslavement of this friend by European powers while “the oldest treaty of friendship” was still in tact. “The falcon of Morocco was trapped in the net of deception,” Iqbal commented (you can read the whole story in the second volume of my biography of Iqbal).

I am reminded of ‘Black Saturday’. On Friday, 25 January 1952, British troops patrolling the Suez killed 46 Egyptian policemen. Riots broke out in Cairo the very next day, rendezvous of European elite were burnt down and 17 British people got killed.

Cambridge scholar A. J. Arberry (1905-69) could be just one of many who reacted. In the preface of his next book he lamented the burning of Cairo (but not the death of 46 native policemen) and suggested that the influence of Iqbal and Pakistan must be contained if Western superiority is to be maintained over the East.

Arberry suggested that Pakistani and Muslim intellectuals themselves could be enlisted for the task. He was right. Pakistani academia turned out to be so hungry for recognition that they swooned upon reading that preface: a Western scholar had mentioned their country and their national poet! Unanimously, they declared Arberry to be “Iqbal’s disciple” and invited him periodically to deliver lectures about Iqbal, Quran and Muslim civilization.

Roxana Saberi: justice prevailed?

2009-05-12T06:46:00.006+06:00

"Roxana Saberi: Out of Iranian Prison, Into a Soap Opera" was the headline at Yahoo! News. The Iranian-American who was convitced in Iran for spying has been released and, as expected, Western media is praising the right thing for the wrong reason.

It is sickening, really, to see the tag of "analysis" on pieces which shamelessly weigh the diplomatic and other benefits which Iran might gain out of this gesture. Is this how the fate of the accused will now be determined?

Iran aught to be condemned if it released Saberi due to any consideration other than justice and fairplay: another journalist accused of similar crimes served two years in prison while yet another is still languishing in an Iranian jail. Above all, it is grossly unfair to Saberi herself that her release should not be exploited by the media of her own country (i.e. the US) for restoring her prestige by focussing on her innocence.

When I first heard about Saberi's conviction, I could not help drawing a parallel between her case and that of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, the alleged victim of rape and torture at the hands of American authorities who is now in the controversial custody of the Americans at Carswell. Both were women, the charges were disputed in both cases and there were reports of foul play by the authorities (it was reported in the case of Saberi that she was tricked into confessing her guilt). I hoped that the Iranian authorities would act more responsibly than their American counterparts. Let's hope that they have.

Iran is the proud heir to the double legacy of Zulqarnain and Islam. As such, it needs to set new standards for justice and fairplay in our times. The release of Saberi should be the beginning.

Iran's official verdict seems to be that the court's order was a gesture of "Islamic mercy." That should gain more attention and Iran should be encouraged to be persistent in that: we have heard about the tragic case of Delara Darabi who was recently executed in Iran in a manner which was unfair, to say the least (and she was also reported to have been tricked into confessing). Responsible media, whether Western or Eastern, should help ensure that such things don't happen again. For this, principles must be shown as a higher priority than diplomatic and material gains.

Even in terms of those gains, Iran has got more to lose than win through a reputation for buying American favors at the cost of principles: US is not exactly the most popular state in the world now. Outside Israel, many might have been respecting Iran for having a backbone. Bending over backwards could hurt that.

Obama’s Message to Iran: a Fruedian Slip?

2009-05-09T02:52:00.004+06:00

Under the glaring subheading “Obama and Saadi” on the page of Sheikh Saadi, the Wikipedia tells us that the U.S. President Barack Obama quoted Saadi's Gulistan in a videotaped Nowruz (New Year's) greeting to the Iranian people in March 2009, saying, “There are those who insist that we be defined by our differences. But let us remember the words that were written by the poet Saadi, so many years ago: “The children of Adam are limbs to each other, having been created of one essence.’”

Cute, isn’t it? Well, unfortunately, the quote comes from Story 10 of Chapter 1 in Gulistan. The story is about a cruel king who was afraid of a mighty enemy. He said to Saadi that since Sufis could connect so well with others, why wouldn't Saadi unite his mind with the king’s and do something for him? That is when Saadi retorted with the famous lines, pointing out the mideeds of the king himself!

The quote is famous: it also graces the entrance to the Hall of Nations in the UN building in New York but apparently the White House did some homework, because the translation is different and more accurate (taken from Richard Burton with a single modification).

Now that the ice is being broken between US and Iran, perhaps we could have had a much-awaited laughter if the Iranian President had returned the gesture by reading to the US Presdient the complete reply of Saadi:

With a powerful arm and the strength of the wrist
To break the five fingers of a poor man is sin.
Let him be afraid who spares not the fallen
Because if he falls no one will take hold of his hand.
Whoever sows bad seed and expects good fruit
Has cudgelled his brains for nought and begotten vain imaginations.
Extract the cotton from thy ears and administer justice to thy people
And if thou failest to do so, there is a day of retribution.
The sons of Adam are limbs of each other
Having been created of one essence.
When the calamity of time afflicts one limb
The other limbs cannot remain at rest.
If thou hast no sympathy for the troubles of others
Thou art unworthy to be called by the name of a man.

GTMO Lawyers Risk Detention

2009-04-15T04:49:00.003+06:00

It seems that two GTMO attorneys face the risk of being detained "because of a letter they sent to President Obama explaining their client’s allegations of torture by US agents." They have been summoned before a D.C. court on May 11th.

The attorneys are Clive Stafford Smith and Ahmad Ghappour (Smith is the legal director of the UK charity Reprieve and has represented more than fifty Guantanamo Bay prisoners. He is author of Eight O’Clock Ferry to the Windward Side: Seeking Justice in Guantanamo Bay).

I came across this informtion at the blog One Heart for Peace, where more information is available.

Taliban flogging a teenage girl: tribute to Ayn Rand?

2009-04-04T01:44:00.004+05:00

Here is the video of a girl being flogged by Taliban in SWAT Valley. Two to three men hold her facedown while one flogs her bottom, disregarding her painful cries. Very Ayn Rand sort of stuff, indeed! Rand might have said that the girl gave “an engraved invitation”– if she lives in the Atlantis of Taliban then that should be regarded as a sufficient consent. Now, if this 17-year old girl is a true heroine by the standards of Ayn Rand, then immediately after this flogging she must fall in love with all three of these men, turn by turn. In that case we could have it serialized on Pakistan Television and call it The Return of Teesra Kinara.

Disgusting, utterly! Please take a look at this video, so that you are prepared when such things happen in your home town – Islamabad, London, New York, Mexico, New Delhi, Karachi, Jamaica, Mauritius, wherever that may be. Taliban and militant Islam is a camouflage. The real threat which lurks over the world today is that ideology of hypocrisy which has so many different faces but whose common trunk is disregard for law and disrespect of human soul.

Especially for urban Pakistan, the video is a must-watch because here such things are quite likely to be happening abundantly in the near future.

Rural Pakistan cannot care less about such trivialities because women, children and weaker men there are used to receiving worse treatment at the hand of feudal lords, honorable officers, visiting rulers of brotherly states and of course the US drones. One wonders if these people should actually start looking at the Taliban as lesser of the two evils, since the other one represented by the democratically elected US government (duly respected by the rulers of Pakistan) is indiscriminately killing everyone who comes in the range of drone attacks; the Taliban at least exercise discretion in picking up their victims in these areas.

My opinion on this matter is just as good (or bad) as anyone else’s. However, if I may be allowed to suggest: our solutions lie in (a) restoring respect for law; (b) sovereignty of states WITHIN THEIR OWN BOUNDARIES and (c) common goals for humanity which strengthen regional peace rather than making a joke of it.

Here is the video: “Coming soon to a place near you.”

Captive-Bonding: the Philosophy of Ayn Rand

2009-03-20T05:37:00.004+05:00

My cell phone rang at 2:31 am. It was a dear friend who had just finished reading my post about Ayn Rand (sent only a few minutes earlier). He couldn’t wait till morning to ask, “In which book did Ayn Rand preach rape?”

By 10:00 am, I had received more feedback than I have about any other post so far. I am obliged to clarify a few points.

Ayn Rand (1905-1982) is tricky business. She attracts many who detest themes of “guilt, fear and pity” which dominate the “high literature”, for instance:

A young girl is raped by her employer (a swindler) on the first day of the job. She becomes a devoted mistress…
A young girl gets attracted to a man who cannot help thinking sexually about every female who walks on two feet. On their third meeting she decides to elope with him while he is being chased by authorities…
A young couple runs away from oppression to find shelter in a wasteland, where the girl kneels before him to be taken…
A young heiress gets raped by an angry worker. She starts sleeping with him and continues even after getting married in her own class…
A young girl is raped by her trusted friend and gets fascinated by him. Afterwards, she is taken by a married man and starts an affair with him. When she sets out to kill someone who has caused damage to her family business she gets caught by him and falls in love with him…

We would welcome an author to rescue us from such themes and offer healthy alternatives. That is what Rand promises to do but, ironically, the five themes described here are themes of her five works of fiction. We therefore need to ascertain whether she actually delivers what she promises or whether she is a confidence artist selling us the same stuff which she denounces vehemently, and getting away with it by putting big words into big mouths of burglars, murderers, rapists and society girls in order to make them sound heroic.

The works cited here are, respectively:

Night of January 16th, Rand’s first significant stage play
We the Living, Rand’s first novel which she claimed to be partially autobiographical
Anthem, a novelette
Fountainhead, her most commercially successful novel in her lifetime
Atlas Shrugged, her last novel which is claimed to be philosophical and “prophetic” and is setting new records in popularity since 09/11

In most cases, the “initiations” of Rand heroines are incidents of rape – brutal and disgusting – but camouflaged with philosophical bombasts by culprits whom the author wishes to present as heroes. Here is the incident from Night of January 16th narrated by the victim herself:

“He said he’d give me a thousand kroner if I would go into the inner office and take my skirt off. I said I wouldn’t. He said if I didn’t, he’d take me. I said, try it. He did… After a while, I picked up my clothes; but I didn’t go. I stayed. I kept the job.”

Now consider this segment from the famous detailed rape of Dominique by Howard Roark in Fountainhead:

It was an act that could be performed in tenderness, as a seal of love, or in contempt, as a symbol of humiliation and conquest. It could be the act of a lover or the act of a soldier violating an enemy woman. He did it as an act of scorn. Not as love, but as defilement. And this made her lie still and submit.

Explanations offered by Rand make it worse. It has been said that she justified one of these incidents as “rape by engraved invitation.” Likewise, a comment on my blog entry defended the incident as “what might be considered a consensual rape”. Needless to say, such arguments have no room in a modern discussion on the subject but date back to ancient laws certain cultures where rape could be blamed on “provocative behavior” of the victim. “Rape by engraved invitation” and “consensual rape” are not denials – they do not suggest that depicting rape wasn’t the authors’ intention. They are justifications.

These are not “role plays” occurring within otherwise healthy relationships. The men in both cases are strangers. If these are not incidents of rape then how do we define sexual violence? If a victim begins to like the rapist, this doesn’t mean that the rapist is a hero. It means that the victim needs to see a shrink.

Nor are these some minor incidents embedded in a work of fiction focused elsewhere. We are talking about a persistent theme recurring in significant manner in several works. Increase in Rand’s popularity in America is alarming because what lies beneath the surface of her work might be quite different from something which could pass as mere perversion (allegations of perversions are commonplaces of modern culture, since what is considered perverse in one era may become acceptable in another). In this case, however, we are dealing with a society witnessing “dramatic increase in popularity” of works which might be promoting rape.

The followers of Ayn Rand are proudly claiming that her popularity inside the US has dramatically increased since 09/11. Is it a mere coincidence that the popularity of the US itself in the world outside has dropped in direct proportion? Today, the connotations globally attached with the words “the United States of America” are not those of democracy, human rights and liberty (and we all know what the new connotations are). Is it even possible that there may be no connection between the acts of a people and their thoughts? Nobody can be in a better position to answer that than the US itself.

Thinker who preached rape

2009-03-19T01:34:00.005+05:00

The most notable 20th Century thinker who maintained that raping a woman was the "moral" prerogative of a strong male was - well, not someone from a third-world country but - Ayn Rand, who claimed to represent the true ideology of the founding fathers of the United States (!).

Out of my respect for heroes like Benjamin Franklin I can only hope that the people of the United States will, one day, come up to refute the claim of Rand but sale statistics of her works point in the other direction. Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights (which I consider to be a contradiction in terms) gives us the following update:

Washington, D.C., March 18, 2009--Earlier this year Ayn Rand's prophetic novel Atlas Shrugged was selling at triple the rate it sold at in the beginning of 2008. Now the novel is soaring to even greater heights, and its trade paperback edition is currently in first place in the Classics category on Amazon.com's best-seller list for sales in the United States. The 50th anniversary mass-market paperback edition of Atlas Shrugged ranks as #2 and the trade paperback Centennial edition ranks as #3. For several weeks Atlas Shrugged has been holding steady in the top 10 best-sellers in the broader United States Literature and Fiction category, and as of the writing of this release, different editions of the novel stand at #3, #5 and #6 in Amazon's ranking. (Read Press Release at ARC website)

That a philosopher in our times should advocate rape as the "moral" prerogative of the male homo sapien is shocking enough. Her ranking as No.1-3 bestseller in the country whose so-called president is called the most powerful "man" on earth is simply disturbing, if an outsider may say so.

Since 09/11, there is supposed to have been a general increase in the popularity of Ayn Rand, who not only preached rape but also maintained that it was "immoral" for US armies to make efforts for sparing civilian lives when they invaded a country.

Can there be a connection between this ideology and the actions of the US authorities during the so-called War Against Terror? Collecting empirical "proof" of such a connection might require decades but simple comparison of Rand's ideology with some of the well-established allegations against the US administration and armies suggests a likelihood. Pity 'tis, 'tis true, true 'tis, 'tis pity.

Moral of the story: everything coming from the West is not necessarily progressive or liberal. For the sake of common human ideals, we need to put an end to stereotyping.

"Ethics" of the story: freedom of expression is an inalienable right of modern societies but does it also cover agressive marketing of books promoting rape and murder?

Aafia's ex-husband

2009-03-18T16:00:00.003+05:00

Words from the ex-husband of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui started pouring into the media some time back (and a little before the recent hearing). We can't be the best judges on the truth behind the grievances of Aafia's husband and the issue of the legal custody of their child(ren), but let's not get distracted from the central moral issue involved: the supremacy of law.

Aafia's guilt or otherwise ought to be determined on the basis of charges against her in a court of law and on no other grounds, and the same goes for any issues between her, her family and her ex-husband.

Unfortunately Aafia's ex-husband seems to be following the bad precedent set by American authorities, i.e. indulging in media trial instead of bringing up issues before a proper court of justice. He is in a good position to correct this bad precedent by taking his grievances to a court of law, and I'm sure that doing that will earn him a great deal of respect which, I hope, he deserves very much.

Custody of children is a legal matter and if this has been denied to Aafia's ex-husband in a wrongful manner then that should be set right by a competent court. Someone needs to restore the prestige of courts as arbiters independent of the media. Aafia's ex-husband is in a good position to take that initiative too.

Media: too arrogant for its own good?

2009-03-16T10:06:00.004+05:00

So, Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Chaudhry gets reinstated and the mainstream Western media, as usual, distorts a crucial section of the story. Consider this recap in a release from the Associated Press (AP) highlighted on the main page of Yahoo!:

“Former President Pervez Musharraf fired Chaudhry, 60, in 2007 after he took up cases challenging the leader's rule, sparking a wave of protests that helped force Musharraf from power in 2008.”

The leading press agency fails to inform the Western audience that the cases which CJ Chaudhry was taking up (and which led to his dismissal by Musharraf) were related to the “missing persons” illegally handed over to American authorities (Read AP Story).

If, in the near future, the Pakistani masses interpret the triumph of the Lawyers’ Movement as also a victory against the unlawful interference of foreign powers in their country, then the AP has successfully failed to prepare its Western audience for understanding the connection. Whether it is sheer arrogance or plain mediocrity of the Western media, we cannot say.

New judgment of Aafia Siddiqui

2009-02-25T22:50:00.005+05:00

The previous judgment which regarded Dr. Aafia Siddiqui as unfit to stand trial seems to have been reversed. Read news report from New York Times

I hope to resume writing in detail on this subject and also update the chronology on my homepage soon. In the meanwhile, I cannot help saying that the case is a reminder to us all that we need to restore the supremacy of law in our troubled world because the official attitudes in cases such as this, and the mockery of justice depicted through the lack of decent procedure in this case is seriously threatening the respect of law as an institution worldwide.

It is not just about Dr. Aafia Siddiqui: it is about what her name literally means, i.e. "comprehensive security." That can come only through respect of law and through no other means.

Karin Friedemann on the Aafia Case

2009-02-09T01:38:00.002+05:00

Karin Friedemann has posted the following very interesting comment on Don't Blame the Victim report at TeethMaestro Blog:

In a conversation with Lord Ahmed, he told me that according to Aafia’s former lawyer, the Federal government was imposing its will on the judge and forcing the judge not to allow Aafia to get medical treatment or released on bail.
Aafia’s uncle and husband are currently on trial at Guantanamo. Clearly innocent, they are requesting martyrdom after years of torture. Not realizing that Osama bin Laden is NOT wanted for 9/11, the detainees have confessed to all kinds of things including crimes they could not possibly have committed since they were in Guantanamo at the time.
The US is covering up the true story of 9/11 and therefore they need to place the blame on Aafia’s uncle, Khalid “the Matermind” as they claim. That is the reason she is a security risk. She could expose the government’s lies and high crimes. These days, the US justifies detaining as a “security risk” anyone, including journalists, who possesses information or evidence about US military and detainee abuses.

Dirty media

2009-01-16T10:12:00.009+05:00

In 'Global assault on local peace' (December 3), I suggested that three basic tactics which become clear from the case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui are dirty media, inquisition trials and 'Zeroland'.

Dirty media is "the tool with which an individual or nation could be declared guilty without trial," as I suggested. We can see this pattern in several issues that are threatening the peace and/or sanity of the world today:

Dr. Aafia Siddiqui was branded an al Qaeda terrorist without even the minimum requirement of bringing such allegations against her in any court of law in the first place.

Following the Mumbai Carnage in November, the extremist elements in India were quick to accuse Pakistan. Once again, it was media rather than impartial investigation and reliance on facts which put fuel in the campaign.

The current state-sponsored terrorism of Israel against the people of Palestine is being labelled as war or retaliation against militants

In each of these case we find that the dominant media is giving a certain color to events and states, lobbyists and decision-makers are either becoming slavish followers of opinions created by the media, or they are part of the media's invasion on sanity.

It is not only individuals and states who are being threatened. Today, reason and sanity are at risk.

Why they don't try the accused?

2009-01-15T10:13:00.004+05:00

It is infuriating to see some officials acting as if they can get away with insulting the intelligence of the whole world simply by using emotional blackmail over the 09/11 incident which now seems less tragic in comparison with what has been unleashed on the world since then.

"Tortured 9/11 suspect may never be prosecuted: Pentagon official," is the headline on Yahoo! News today. While making such chilling and uncivilized statemenets as that "sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, nudity and prolonged exposure to cold" are all authorized "interrogation procedures," Ms. Susan Crawford tries to become a champion of human rights by stating that in the case of the alleged "20th Hijacker of 09/11", these techniques were stretched a bit too far and therefore she has decided, oh so benevolently, that the "suspect" should not be brought to trial!

Can we think of a greater insult to intelligence? Rather than admitting that after prolonged captivity and torture, and after ransacking half of the civilized world (arguably, all of which may now be seen as lying outside the US), the US authorities have failed to bring any shred of evidence in an important case related to 09/11? Incidentally, Dr. Aafia Siddiqui will also not be tried but, we are supposed to believe, for a different reason.

The pattern is becoming clearer: Pick them up and build hype in the media, grab some more oil wells, confiscate some more land from an Asian country, and then release the victim. Case dismissed, hope the world will forget.

What happened to Binyam

2009-01-07T07:22:00.002+05:00

The case of the British resident Binyam Mohamed might interest those who are following the story of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui. The US Justice Department dropped the key allegations against Binyam, according to Washington Post, October 15. However:

one of the confessions that was tortured out of Binyam is so ludicrous that it was soon dropped, but not before Clive Stafford Smith had learnt of it and had been able to use it to demonstrate the extent to which it indicated that all of Binyam's "confessions" were untrustworthy [From blog entry at One Heart for Peace]

According to this "confession", Binyam admitted having dinner with al Qaeda personnel in Karachi when, as it turned out later, two of the said personnel were already in US custody on the said date!

Those who follow the case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui often wonder what motive or purpose any authorities might have had for keeping her in detention for five long years and committing those attrocities which have been reported in the press. Unfortunately, some of the things which Binyam tells about his own ordeal seem to have a dark, horrendous analogy:

Some of the time they said that some big people in al-Qaeda were talking about me. Some of the time they told me that the U.S. had a story they wanted from me and it was their job to get it. They talked about Jose Padilla and they said I was going to testify against him and big people. They named Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Ibn Sheikh al-Libi. I was meant to be working with these people, giving them ideas like the dirty bomb. It is hard to pin down the exact story, because what they wanted changed all the time. First in Morocco it changed, then when I was in the Dark Prison, then in Bagram and again in Guantánamo Bay. Binyam explained that, between the savage beatings and the razor cuts to his penis, his torturers "would tell me what to say." He added that even towards the end of his time in Morocco, they were still "training me what to say," and one of them told him, "We're going to change your brain." [From blog entyry at One Heart for Peace]

It seems possible that some of these things also happened to Aafia, and and for similar purposes - except that in that case the victims included three minor children as well.

The death of law

2008-12-23T07:47:00.007+05:00

Since I started the blog About Aafia, the most frequently asked question has been, "But do you think she's innocent?" At first, I was apologetic, like many decent people. Then I began to see the error in the question.

A person is innocent or guilty on the basis of charges presented in a court of law. The only charge brought against Dr. Aafia Siddiqui in the court is that involving an M4 rifle, which is so absurd that it is difficult to see how any self-respecting court of law can admit it at face value.

Having links with Al Qaeda, money laundering, smuggling of contact diamonds, plotting to destroy US installments, and other such things are what we heard about Aafia through the media, but none of these have been pursued in the court. This is called extra-judicial bias. In the past, courts used to consider it as the greatest possible insult to them. Now, a New York court seems to be patronizing it.

This is where media acquires supremacy over law, and a court becomes a rubber stamp in the hands of media barons. A precedent has been set: you don't need to bring charges against someone in a court anymore. Accusing the person through television, newspapers is sufficient to throw her or him in prison for indefinite period. Courts will dare not interfere.

Can a society survive without law? The answer is, No. There just cannot be any other answer, except a categorical, emphatic, No. Please imagine, if law becomes completely irrelevant in a case as famous as Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, then is there any chance that law may continue to matter after this? My answer, No.

Wake up call

2008-12-21T18:41:00.009+05:00

"Will Aafia be released on December 17?" I asked in the previous post a week before the recent hearing. Against all odds, I speculated that she was unlikely to be released on that date. Against all odds, my speculation turned out to be correct.

This is not a test of the US legal system anymore. Through this trial, that system has been tested and found wanting. The writing on the wall now invites every self-respecting individual to find out about the case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui and arrive at an independent, objective judgement. It is not about a woman and her children anymore. Now it's about your self-respect.

Whether or not you take interest in this issue should not depend on whether or not you are interested in human rights. Now it must depend on whether or not you desire sanity and reason to prevail in this world.

Here are the barse essentials of the case:

US authorities were accused of kidnapping a woman along with her three minor children, keeping the woman in illegal detention for five years where she was reported to have been raped and tortured. Internationally reputed organizations sent petitions to US President.
US authorities finally admitted of having that woman in their custody but prevented her from giving evidence by prosecuting her on the basis of a counter-allegation.

What is the charge against Dr. Aafia Siddiqui? Only this: she picked up an M4 rifle while in custody, and randomly fired two rounds on US military personnel. Please remember that no other allegation has been brought against her in the court.

Impartial experts says that this story is not theoretically possible. Yet, on the basis of this absurd accusation, a victim has been turned into accused and given over to the custody of the party originally accused of raping her and abducting her three children. She was first brought in the court on August 4, and was bleeding from bullet wounds. Instead of a hospital she was sent to prison under maximum security. For one reason or the other, her detention is being prolonged and the absurdity of the allegation against her is not being tested in the court.

Do you see the problem? It is an insult to intelligence - your intelligence. Is Aafia innocent? You may like to ask before you make up your mind. I shall address that question in the next post, but please, in the meanwhile, kindly spread the word. People across the world need to know this case and arrive at their own independent judgment. If you think that this blog can help, then please pass on this address to others.

Will Aafia be released on December 17?

2008-12-10T23:31:00.006+05:00

Looking at how this trial has been conducted so far, there is very little hope that Dr. Aafia Siddiqui will be released even on December 17.

To begin with, she was remanded on an accusation which wouldn't have been taken seriously by any self-respecting court of law. That whole story of her picking up an M4 rifle and firing two rounds at random was illogical. Yet, it was the only charge brought against her. On such an implausible charge she was remanded without bail!

A pattern has become obvious by now: whatever could be the farthest from justice and common sense has been happening at every turn. Since it is rational and would make sense that having been announced mentally unfit a month ago, Aafia should be released on December 17, therefore it should be the least expected.

Instead, anything "unexpected" can happen - any violation of decency, justice and common sense (after all, this is a case regarding which the US envoy to Pakistan didn't flinch from making a very misleading public statement)!

Countdown has begun

2008-12-09T21:23:00.003+05:00

December 17 is the date when the ceremony of a hearing for determining the mental ability of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui to stand a trial will be performed. That is the day when the US legal system will be tested in the eyes of the most optimistic observers. For others, it has already been tested and found wanting.

Injustices which have been carried out since Aafia first appeared in a US court have been listed in Don't Blame the Victim, an analytical report published online by People's Resistence, a rights group in Pakistan:

Following incidents which can be seen as injustice or malpractice have occurred after August 6, when Aafia was first presented in New York:
Victim was remanded on implausible charges
Bail was not even sought by her lawyers
US envoy gave a questionable statement about victim’s children
It’s possible that the victim’s eldest son was brainwashed before being handed over by Afghan authorities
Motion to establish the victim as mentally unfit to stand trial, if accepted, will disqualify her from giving evidence later against her abusers
At Carswell, the victim can be at risk of being brainwashed or rendered incapable of providing evidence
Two children of the victim are still missing. If they are still alive then it is possible that they are being used as hostages to pressurize her.
Allegations of her illegal detention, rape, etc, and the abduction of her children, are going unaddressed.

It seems that rather than the US legal system it is the collective conscience of the ordinary cictizens of America that is at test here. To say the least, if such a case had come up in Pakistan, the human rights groups as well as ordinary liberals and progressives there would have been far more active, and perhaps effective, than their counterparts in the US have been.

Global assault on local peace

2008-12-03T20:39:00.007+05:00

The recent cricis in South Asia highlights the importance of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui Case. The same tactics which were used for denying justice to one rape victim are now being used for creating a regional crisis. Chief among these are dirty media, inquisition trial and 'Zeroland' policy:

dirty media is the tool with which an individual or nation could be declared guilty without trial
inquisition trials give legal cover to extrajudicial practices
'Zeroland' (term taken from the novelist Ibne Safi) is an approach of disregarding sovereignty of other states while avoiding to be called imperialist

I shall try to explain these in latter posts, but the importance of the Aafia Case now becomes greater. As has been pointed out in Don't Blame the Victim, an analytical report released by a rights group in Pakistan, a clearer understanding of this case can help us understand what's going wrong with our world, and by acquiring justice for this single victim we could go a long way in redressing the wrong policies affecting the world peace today.

Objection, My Lord!

2008-12-03T04:08:00.011+05:00

Recent developments in the case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, the rape victim turned accused, are disturbing. Those who hoped that she might get relief, if not justice, from US courts are now fast losing that hope. December 17 is the scheduled date of hearing for deciding whether she is mentally fit to stand trial, but a full month ahead of that date, on November 17, Judge Berman announced the medical report declaring her mentally unfit.

For many around the world who are following this case without bias, the decision seems to be a foreshadow of what's coming ahead:

Aafia has been announced mentally unstable but the judge has allowed the so-called psychiatric evaluation to complete it's course. Why?
Is there even a possibility of her release even if she's declared mentally unfit on December 17?

Those from the international community who follow this case have been presuming that there was. What if there isn't? The questions are harrowing.

If no reliable results have been arrived at, then the report shouldn't have been announced. If results are reliable enough to be announced through a respectable judge, then there shouldn't be any further need to keep Aafia at Carswell. While announcing that she's mentally unfit to stand trial, the court still did not order her release.

Don't blame the victim

2008-10-21T07:05:00.017+06:00

As has been rightly pointed out in a comment on a recent post, the latest development in the case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is casting an undesirable shadow which could hamper the lawyers who are defending her. The dilemma seems to arise out of a thorn that has been pricking the conscience (including that of many in the US itself) since August 4 when Department of Justice presented its charge sheet against Aafia. Is this a case where victim is being accused?

The whole affair involves three allegations, not one:

Against Aafia: FBI alert (2003)
Against US authorities: abduction, rape and torture of Aafia and abduction of her three minor children (July 2008 and before)
Againat Aafia: attacking US military personnel (made public on August 4)

The FBI alert of 2003 has not been followed up in the indictment. The plea of human rights organizations including Amnesty International, Asian Human Rights Commission and many others that Aafia and her children were victims reached its high water mark in July 2008 when urgent appeals were sent to leaders including the US President. Ironically, when finally the victim got a chance to be heard in a court of law, the accused party and/or organizations related to it were given custody of her and she is now being tried on counter-allegation.

The ability of the US legal system to provide justice to Aafia will become relevant only if/when a case is filed on her behalf against her alleged tormentors. The current trial is being held against her. The possibiliy of providing "justice" to Aafia as a victim of abuse and recovering her two minor children who are still missing has not even been brought up in any US court so far. Under the present circumstances, the court can only decide whether Aafia is guilty, not guilty or mentally unfit to stand trial. The court cannot, under the present circumstances, punish those who are accused of abusing her nor can it even ask them to release information about the whereabouts of Aafia's two minor children.

That is the basic problem and if this is not addressed, then, sadly, the whole affair may create further ill-will despite valuable efforts by some legal personnel to maintain fairness in the current trial.

Aafia's mental health deteriorating?

2008-10-18T06:58:00.009+06:00

Dr. Aafia Siddiqui had another visitor six days after senators from Pakistan, according to Dr. Fouzia Siddiqui, her sister. This visitor was Aafia's brother. According to him, she was brought in handcuffs and chains to meet him. She was frail and bent. “Aafia has no insight to the extent of allegations against her," according to Fouzia. "She was paranoid and at times delusional." According to this report, Aafia was so tired of the torture and abuse that she had requested the facility authorities not to put her on DNR (artificial respiratory system) and let her die. “Putting on artificial respiratory system once saved her life, when she became unconscious during torture,” the sister added.

Four senators who met Aafia on October 6 verified, just like representatives of Pakistan embassy earlier, that Aafia appeared to be mentally stable. That statement caused concern because American lawyers of persecution and defense had unanimously raised questions about Aafia's mental capability to stand trial. According to senators, Aafia said that she didn't trust her American lawyers.

That raised some serious concern about whether there might be ulterior motives behind having Aafia certified as mentally unstable. The entire episode of her transfer to Carswell for "psychiatric evaluation" appeared shady.

Now, the headline given by Daily Times to statement of Dr. Aafia's sister is 'Senators’ statements shock Dr Aafia’s family'. It is followed by subheading, 'Fouzia asks "how could a person be happy after years of torture?"’ However, far from refuting the senators' statement, the report is likely to ring further alarm.

Aafia's brother met her on October 12, six days after the senators. If both statements are correct then the conclusion is rather disturbing: Aafia appeared more stable on October 6 than on October 12. Is her mental health deteriorating at Carswell?

Protest activism

2008-10-18T06:25:00.008+06:00

Recently an activist stated his position by saying, "Well, in my view, political activists make demands not because they think it's plausible to meet in the near future or in current situation, but mainly because they are making a statement."

That might be just what is going wrong in our times. In some of its forms, activism has become "opiate of the people." Everybody makes a statement and soon there is enough noise to drown any invitation for arriving at consensus.

Protest activism has its merits and has worked well in many cases in the past but issues have become so entangled now that people who agree on one point might be in disagreement on everything else. How far can they go if each one of them insists on making all the statements which their heart dictates?

Activist, historian and political leader (and lawyer) from Pakistan Aitzaz Ahsan said when Dr. Aafia Siddiqui was presented in a US court, "this is a test case for US legal system." While that may or may not be, but the case is almost certainly a test for human rights: can we find ways of being effective rather than just being noisy?

Analysis of US envoy's letter

2008-10-16T04:46:00.015+06:00

Many Pakistanis have special affection for US envoys (see "Recap" on the right) and hence the letter of Anne W. Paterson on August 16 hurt the sentiment and reason of many, as they wished that it had been worded differently. Why? The answer comes in a candid repartee by Kamran Shafi, renowned columnist of Dawn, the leading English newspaper:

Defies description, your letter, Excellency. I have read and re-read the account of Siddiqui’s alleged “firing — unprovoked” over the months since you wrote that letter. Of how Siddiqui came out screaming from behind a curtain where she was being held “unrestrained”, and, picking up an M4 US army service rifle, aimed and fired at an American (warrant) officer. She is said to have missed her target because an Afghan translator who was sitting at arm’s length from her leapt at her and deflected the rifle.
Excellency, for someone who has handled small arms as a soldier in the infantry; has taught them, and therefore has fired thousands of rounds from all types of small arms, I can’t for the life of me imagine even a first-class shooter pick up a rifle he/she did not know, cock it, find the safety catch and flip it, and fire it in under the three seconds that it probably took the alleged Afghan translator to allegedly lunge at Siddiqui and allegedly deflect her alleged shot. Unless, that is, a handbook on the use of the M4 and a certificate from a weapons training school somewhere in America that she was a trained M4 shooter were also found in Siddiqui’s handbag when she was caught by the Afghan police loitering outside the Ghazni governor’s compound!
You also do not tell us that if it is true that Siddiqui was prevented from hitting her target by the Afghan translator (and had probably been well and truly subdued for she is no Samson), why it was necessary for the American warrant officer to shoot her in the abdomen “at least once”. What was the point? Neither do you tell us what “at least once” means. Are we to think that the authorities who first held her in Afghanistan after the shooting, those that held her in New York City, and those who now hold her in Houston are still baffled as to how many times the woman was shot?
Also, you have nowhere in your letter mentioned the 13-year-old boy who was seen in a photograph taken soon after she was shot “at least once” sitting by her side. Indeed, you said in your published letter to the press: “The United States has no definitive knowledge as to the whereabouts of Ms Siddiqui’s children”. Then who was the teenager who was repatriated by the Afghan government and is now reunited with his mother’s family?
By the way Excellency, if you care to notice, Aafia Siddiqui is about your build and dimensions. May I suggest you get one of your Marines at the embassy to bring you a US army-issue M4 rifle. Now ask him to clear the chamber, affix the magazine, put the rifle on ‘safe’, and place it on the ground which would be the exact position in which Aafia Siddiqui found hers and with which she is alleged to have fired upon the US officer. You may very well fail to even cock it in 10 seconds, let alone find the safety catch, lift the rifle to your shoulder and fire it. Would that you had recalled the disgrace his handlers brought your former boss, the good Gen Colin Powell, when they made him tell fibs on live TV about Iraq’s so-called weapons of mass destruction, before you sent your letter to the press.

You can read the complete article by Kamran Shafi (who promises to write more) in Dawn, and see what an M4 rifle looks like at The Musings of a Silly Bachi.

Senators Vs. Attorneys

2008-10-14T03:49:00.009+06:00

One of the most interesting feedback I received about previous entry 'Aafia speaks out' was through email and it deserves to be posted as an entry by itself:

I read your entry about "Aafia speaks out" and I am more confused now than before that why Pakistani delegation paint a rosy picture of her condition. She is basically in sound mental and physical condition according to the delegation which is in sharp contrast with what her attorneys have been saying.
I also read that Aafia does not trust her lawyers. I know her lawyers at least one of them Liz Fink was the first one to make us all aware of her pitiful condition. I know first hand how challenging it is these days to question anything regarding terrorism- related issues in the US and of course she was mocked by some people in that crowd during that press briefing [watch video of press briefing - Khurram].
I am not an attorney and know very little about legal issues, but I know this for sure that any statement regarding Aafia's situation should have been shared with her lawyers before making it public. It boggles the mind why Pakistani delegation acted the way they did. I only hope that the delegation knew what they were doing and I am the one who is missing something here!

It may be added here that one of the senators was S. M. Zafar, a very famous lawyer in Pakistan. Answering a question from journalists in New York he said that there was no need to meet Dr Aafia’s lawyers, as it was a case of human rights not a legal dispute (reported in International News Network). However, the questions raised by the emailer remain important, and if the senators know what they were doing then it won't hurt if they share it with the general public.

Dr. Aafia Siddiqui speaks out

2008-10-11T00:30:00.004+06:00

At last a word has come out from Dr. Aafia Siddiqui herself about her travails.

On Tuesday, October 6, four Pakistani senators (Mushahid Hussain Syed, Sadia Abbasi, Talha Mehmood and S. M Zafar) and representative of Pakistani embassy Faqir Seed met her in Texas but unfortunately their account has not been properly covered in many news reports. One of the exceptions is Daily Times, whose correspondent Khalid Hasan has given a remarkably detailed account of what Aafia told the senators in a meeting which lasted 2 hours and 45 minutes.

According to her:

She was on her way to the Karachi airport in 2003 with her children when she was taken. She remembers being given an injection and when she came to she was in a cell.
She was being brainwashed by men who spoke perfect English. They could be Afghan or others. She did not think they were Pakistanis.
She was being forced to admit things she had allegedly done. She was made to sign statements, some of which included information on phone calls she was said to have made.
She has been tortured (but she provided no details).
She was told by her captors that if she did not co-operate, her children would suffer (two of them are still missing).
She said she did not know where her children were and it was not clear if they had been with her during her captivity.
The assault case against her has no basis in fact.
She expressed her lack of confidence in the court hearing her case and the US legal system
She said she didn't trust the American lawyers who are representing her.

Aafia's version is not basically different from what the human rights organizations including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and Asian Human Rights Commission have been suspecting for long (and it is not just Aafia's "family" or her "lawyers" who have been raising these allegations, although some news report attempt to give that impression).

The importance of this meeting cannot be exagerrated because now, finally, Aafia has narrated her side of the story in her own words, however incoherent she may be due to the stress she has been through. The world had been wanting to hear her side.

Reactions to Carswell

2008-10-10T04:13:00.000+06:00

General reaction to the transfer of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui to Carswell (reputed to be a "house of horrors") can be guaged from headlines which various newspapers and blogs gave to the report of her sister's protest against the decision. Here is a sample from Pakistani press:

Regional Times: Fouzia Siddiqui sees shifting of Dr Aafia as conspiracy to kill her

The News International: US court’s psychiatric evaluation of Dr Aafia slated

Daily Times: Bring my sister back immediately:Dr Fauzia

The Nation: Sister rejects psychiatric evaluation orders of Aafia

And from elsewhere:

Urgent Petition submitted on Care2 News Network: WE DON’T WANT DR. AAFIA TO CONTINUE TO SUFFER WHILE SHE WAITS FOR HER TRIAL!

United4Justice: Shameful ruling by US court

"Shameful ruling by US court" is especially surprising. A bit too harsh?

Carswell, where Aafia is now

2008-10-09T00:52:00.000+06:00

A frequent visitor of the blogosphere pointed out in an email to me that there is a page on Wikipedia about the Federal Medical Center (FMC) Carswell in Fort Worth, Texas, where Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is said to have been shifted now.

What I found on that page was not very pleasant, to say the least. Here is an excerpt:

Articles criticizing FMC Carswell have appeared in various media outlets relating to various forms of prisoner abuse. These articles focus on allegations of medical malpractice, neglect, and sexual abuse of inmates by staff. Indeed, over a seven-year period, seven FMC Carswell staff members were convicted of sexual abuse of a prisoner...
In May 2008, Vincent Inametti, 48, a Roman Catholic priest who worked as a chaplain at FMC Carswell, was sentenced to 48 months in prison and ordered to pay a $3000 fine after pleading guilty in November 2007 to two counts of sexual abuse of a ward.

Click here for the page on Wikipedia

Comment on Karin Friedmann

2008-10-06T19:50:00.000+06:00

Karin Friedmann, editor of World View News Service writes about Dr. Aafia Siddiqui in a blog entry:

During her years as an undergraduate and graduate student, Aafia was like a force of nature in her missionary zeal. She was very active in the Muslim Students' Association, in helping to manage a religious information (daw'ah) table in the MIT student center, in teaching Quran to recent converts to Islam, in prison ministry, and in collecting winter boots to send to Bosnia.

Moneeza Ahmed, a liberal human rights activist from Pakistan makes the following observation about it:

It's interesting how doing any work around Islam or even apparently being part of the Muslim Students Asssociation is so easily linked to being a terrorist - I mean she was tabling in an MIT student centre and collecting money for freezing kids in Bosnia. Give me a freaking break!
It's sad that the article which seems to be from a progressive site still thought that it was important to mention that she was engaged in Dawah and a member of the Muslims Students Association.

Candid? It seems so.

Who done it?

2008-10-02T03:48:00.000+06:00

It's all over the international media that the US Attorney Michael Garcia wrote to Judge Berman on September 22 that Dr. Aafia Siddiqui may be unfit for trial, and the judge has now ordered her complete physical and psychological check-up (see Chronology of the Aafia Case).

It's interesting to note that according to Barrister Syed Iqbal Jafree of Pakistan, the suggestion originated from him but had a slightly different purport. Barrister Jafree, who is fighting the case for Aafia's repatriation in Pakistan, says in a comment posted on Miss Kelly blog:

I also wrote to US Attorney that Aafia is unfit to stand trial. That he should exercise prosecutorial discretion and withdraw charges even without prejudice, repatriate her and when she is well, commence proper extradition procedings in Pakistan. This will generate goodwill for USA. As an America, Harvard trained lawyer, I felt his writing to US Distt (Trial) Judge was unnecessary in response to my letter. [Read the rest of his comment]

It seems that the Pakistani press didn't report Barrister Jafree's letter. Or did I miss it?

Is Aafia US citizen?

2008-10-02T01:43:00.000+06:00

In a news report about the hearing of a petition in Islamabad High Court on September 25, the Chief Justice was mentioned as saying that Dr. Aafia Siddiqui was US citizen. Apparently he was quoting from an Interior Ministry statement.

The news report did not mention if Barrister Syed Iqbal Jafree, the petitioner, responded to this in the court but interestingly a comment was posted by him five days later on Miss Kelly, a blog of "musings on culture, politics, Catholicism, religion, sports and furry things". Here, he reiterates that Aafia is Pakistani citizen:

I may add that Aafia is not US citizen, but her son and daughter (except youngest son) are US citizens. [Read the rest of his comment]

Another contradiction in the case? This one is baffling, to say the least!

Contradictions in the case

2008-09-30T22:08:00.000+06:00

Particularly annoying in the Aafia Case are abundance of contradictions and indifference towards them by the authorities.

When Saqib Rauf, Pakistan’s acting consul general in the US, met Aafia Siddiqui in New York a few days after her appearance in the FBI custody:

...he told the reporters that he was amazed to see how articulate and clearheaded she was under the circumstances. “She inquired after the health of her mother and the political conditions in Pakistan,” he added. [Read story in Dawn, August 9]

About six weeks later, U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia tells Judge Richard M. Berman there is reason to believe Aafia is suffering from mental disease and unfit to stand trial, while Aafia's lawyer Elizabeth Fink says this might be an effect of five years' torture at Bagram prison. "She has mental illness," says Fink. "She's psychotic." [Read reports from Associated Press and Reuters]

Wouldn't Mr. Saqib Rauf like to add something now? At least he can come forward to tell us that it's okay, we are living in a surreal world!

A Word from Jinnah

2008-08-16T21:35:00.000+06:00

The following reply was given by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, to the speech made by the first Ambassador of the United States of America at the time of presenting credentials on February 26, 1948

Your Excellency!

It gives me great pleasure to welcome you in our midst as the first Ambassador of the United States of America. Though Pakistan is a new State, for well over a century now there have been many connections of trade and commerce between the people of Pakistan and the people of the United States.

This relationship was strengthened and made more direct and intimate during the two World Wars and more particularly and more recently during the Second World War when our two people stood shoulder to shoulder in defense of democracy. The historic fight for self-government by your people and its achievement by them, the consistent teaching and practice of democracy in your country had for generations acted as a beacon light and had in no small measure served to give inspiration to nations who like us were striving for independence and freedom from the shackles of foreign rule.

I cordially share your pleasure at the evidence of friendship and sympathy shown by your country in opening diplomatic relations with Pakistan from the very first day of its establishment as a new State. I would like to add that this friendship has been diligently and consistently furthered by your very able and esteemed colleague, Mr. Charles Lewis, the Charge d’affaires who represented your country here pending Your Excellency’s arrival.

As you have discerned already our infant State has been confronted with grave and dangerous issues and problems from its early days. Though as a new State we have to face a serious situation, we have no doubt in our own minds that by our united will and determination to live as a free and peace-loving people, we shall overcome them successfully.

I thank Your Excellency for your friendly assurances of sympathy in dealing with our many problems. I also deeply appreciate your confidence that our traditions and our past will help us to fulfill the hopes and ideals of our people. In return I can assure Your Excellency that after having emerged from an eclipse which lasted over a century and a half, the people of Pakistan desire nothing which is not their own, nothing more than the goodwill and friendship of all the free nations of the world. We in Pakistan are determined that having won our long-lost freedom we will work to the utmost limit of our capacity not only to build up a strong and happy State of our own but to contribute in the fullest possible measure to international peace and prosperity.

I am glad to learn that Your Excellency and the great country and people you represent, will give your cooperation to us in order to advance our economic and cultural relations for the mutual benefit of both the countries. I am hopeful that good relations and friendship already existing between the people of America and Pakistan will be further strengthened and the bonds of friendship between our two countries will be more firmly riveted.

Your Excellency, I assure you that my Government and I will do all that lies in our power to give you every assistance in the fulfillment of what is our common desire and objective. I once more extend to Your Excellency a warm welcome to Pakistan as the first Ambassador of the United States of America.