Eight die in sectarian attack and clashes in Quetta

QUETTA, March 29: At least eight people, a woman and a policeman among them, were killed and 13 others injured in what appeared to be a sectarian attack on a group of Hazara people and in ensuing clashes between police and protesters here on Thursday.
And two officials of a UN organisation were killed in an attack near Mastung.
According to police, the Hazara people were coming to the city from Hazara Town when four men on motorcycles opened fire on their van on Spiny Road.
“Five people in the van were killed,” DIG (Operation) Qazi Abdul Wahid said, adding that seven people were injured. The assailants escaped after the attack.
Law-enforcement personnel who rushed to the place took the injured to the Bolan Medical College and Civil Hospital. The injured were later shifted to the Combined Military Hospital (CMH). Most of them had suffered multiple bullet wounds.
“It appears to be a sectarian attack,” another police officer said after initial investigation.
Those killed in the attack were identified as Zafar, Alam Khan, Ghulam Sakhi, Hafizullah and Bakhat Jamal.
Hundreds of people belonging to the Hazara tribe gathered on roads to protest against the attack.
They blocked the Brewery Road by erecting barricades and burning tyres.
Several vehicles were torched. The mob set a girls college on fire and attacked a number of government buildings.
Some people fired at police when they were trying to disperse the mob. Constable Khadim Hussain was injured and he later died in hospital.
Two people, Mubarak Shah and Nazir Hussain, were killed and six others injured when police fired back.
Heavy contingents of police and Frontier Corps were deployed at various places in and around the city after the incidents.
FAO OFFICIALS: Two officials of the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Hafizullah and Mohammad Zahid, were killed and another was injured in an attack on their vehicle near Mastung bypass.
According to sources, they were coming to Quetta from Kalat when men on a motorcycle fired at them with automatic weapons.
Levies personnel took the bodies to the Mastung Civil Hospital and later handed them over to relatives. The injured man was brought to a hospital in Quetta.
Agencies add: A spokesman for the Taliban’s Jundullah faction claimed responsibility for the Quetta shooting.
Balochistan Governor Nawab Zulafiqar Ali Magsi and Chief Minister Aslam Khan Raisani condemned the killing.
In a statement issues here, the chief minister termed it a heinous act aimed at sabotaging peace of the province and said the government would take strict action against the elements involved in it.
The governor asked the inspector general of police to apprehend the attackers.

Haqqani will have to come for testimony, says SC

Supreme Court of Pakistan. - File Photo

ISLAMABAD: Former ambassador Husain Haqqani will have to come to Pakistan to testify before the judicial commission investigating authenticity of a controversial memo as the Supreme Court held on Thursday that its earlier order of obligating him to return home whenever called would remain in the field.
A ten-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, assembled to take up a request by the commission`s secretary, granted another six weeks to the commission to complete its job of finding the truth behind the controversy.
The commission`s two-month deadline is expiring on Friday. Now it will have to complete its inquiry by mid-May.
Advocate-on-Record Chaudhry Akhtar Ali submitted an application of Mr Haqqani seeking a court order for the commission to record his testimony through video link — a facility earlier provided to Mansoor Ijaz, a central character of the memo scandal.
“The circumstances have drastically changed since I left the country and that risks to my life are manifold,” Mr Haqqani said in the application.
When asked to argue the case, Chaudhry Akhtar said that Mr Haqqani`s counsel Asma Jehangir would argue it, but currently she was out of the country on general adjournment.
Advocate Akram Sheikh, representing Mr Ijaz, and Naseer Ahmed Bhutta appearing on behalf of Hafeez-ur-Rehman, drew the attention of the court to some contents of the application and said these were derogatory towards members of the commission headed by Balochistan High Court Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa.
The court adjourned further hearing for an indefinite period, but took exception to Mr Haqqani`s letter directly addressed to the chief justice received by court registrar on March 28.
Mr Haqqani had claimed confidentiality on the contents of the letter.
“The manner in which such letters are directly addressed to the chief justice or the judges has already been discouraged when a similar letter was sent by Mr Ijaz,” the chief justice observed.
“Instead of addressing any letter directly to the chief justice or judges of this court, correspondence should be done with the court in official capacity,” the court said and made it clear that its earlier order of January 30 would remain intact.
The order relates to the lifting of a travel ban allowing Mr Haqqani to leave the country to meet his family in the United States but only after he had undertaken to return to Pakistan any time on four days` notice to join the proceedings, if and when required by the commission.
The court extended the second deadline after Attorney General Maulvi Anwarul Haq, who is also appearing before the commission, said he had no objection to the six-week extension.
But Advocate Salahuddin Mengal, one of the petitioners in the memo case, said that one week`s extension was sufficient because the commission had already done its major work.
After hearing both the parties, the court, however, agreed with the request made by the commission`s secretary for the six-month extension to complete the inquiry on the secret memorandum allegedly written by Mr Haqqani to former US military chief Admiral Mike Mullen to pre-empt a military takeover.
On January 30, the Supreme Court allowed two months time in addition to 30 days given to the commission on an application also filed by its secretary.
The commission, which is yet to record the statement of Mr Haqqani, has already given him four opportunities to accept or deny documents produced by Mr Ijaz during his testimony.

Changing tides?

In the aftermath of Pakistan’s loss to India in the Asia Cup recently it makes sense to look at the apparent change in tide.

The Pakistan-India rivalry in ODI cricket can be defined in popular perception by two watershed moments: Miandad’s six and Tendulkar’s uppercut. Before Miandad’s Sharjah heroics, India were the dominant team in Asia; his six changed that. The roles were reversed following the 2003 World Cup, as India beat Pakistan because Tendulkar failed to score a century.

The context of Miandad’s innings is important to remember. India had won the World Cup in 1983, and followed it up with the World Championship in 1985 (a tournament which included all Test playing nations), during the course of which they won both the matches played against Pakistan. Just twelve days after winning that tournament they defended a score of 125 against their great rivals, on a Friday in Sharjah of all places. These were the three (1st of the four ODIs played between the two nations prior to that match in1986. It was with this as background in which Miandad scored a match-winning hundred which included the six of the last ball of the over.

Yet it would be churlish to think that one innings, or shot, changed the pattern of this rivalry. Pakistan really weren’t that far behind India; they had beaten them in their previous encounters in November 1985. The overall record prior to April 18th 1986 was 7 wins and 8 losses for Pakistan. From then till Tendulkar’s uppercut it read 44-21. What changed the course of the war were a series of battles. In the two matches following Miandad’s classic, Pakistan would chase down India’s totals with lower-order partnerships, winning both matches (Sharjah, Indore) by just three wickets. The coup de grace was to follow, though. In front of a packed Eden Gardens, Salim Malik came in with Pakistan five-down, and needing 78 to win at over 10-an-over. He would go on to score an oft-forgotten epic: 72 off 36 balls to deliver Pakistan victory with three balls to spare. Yes, he scored SEVENTY-TWO of the 78 runs required. This included a 50-run partnership with Wasim Akram, in which the left-armer scored three of three balls! This match gave Pakistan a 2-0 lead in the ODI series.

These were the battles which turned the tide. Four consecutive tight chases won by Pakistan – oh, what we’d give for even one now – culminating in a 5-1 series victory in India (the first time either side had won an away bilateral series). A month later Pakistan would win its first Test series victory in India (and India’s only home series loss between 1985 and 2000), and the mental block was well and truly in place.

Tendulkar’s innings stopped the rot, but despite claims to the contrary hasn’t turned the tide in India’s favour. Since the encounter in the 2003 World Cup Pakistan has won 17 and lost 18 of the matches played. This, when not seen in isolation, is interesting reading. Pakistan’s overall win-loss ratio between Miandad and Tendulkar’s shots was 1.08; India’s equivalent was 0.80. Since the 2003 meeting Pakistan’s ratio stands at 0.90 while India’s is 1.19 (all records with Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and other minnows excluded).

The reason for the change in patterns is simple: India post-2003 is a better side than Pakistan, just as Pakistan were the better side before the tournament in South Africa. So, as much as it may come as a surprise, Pakistan, both pre and post 2003, have performed better against India than other sides; and/or India have underperformed against Pakistan.

In the first decade of this century, Pakistan and India reached an equilibrium where India’s batting resources could be challenged by Pakistan’s bowlers – usually Shoaib Akhtar, and in one glorious spring, Rana Naved – allowing Pakistan’s lesser batting to fight on equal footing. Now that India are refusing to make the mistakes that Pakistan made following the 2003 World Cup, i.e. allowing their youngsters to be developed alongside their legends, and Pakistan are bereft of the talents of the level of Mohammad Yousuf and Inzamam, suddenly the tide seems to be turning in India’s favour. This is evidenced by their victories in the last three matches between the two sides (the common factor in all three being the failure of Pakistan’s pacers to take wickets with the new ball).

If this streak is to be their equivalent of 1986-87, then we shall talk for years of how the blitz of an Indian great changed the perception and psychology of the rivalry.

Yes, Harbhajan Singh is going to be India’s Javed Miandad.

Mehrangate: IB chief denies knowledge of ‘secret funds’ misuse

Air marshal (retd) Asghar Khan. – File Photo

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Friday resumed hearing the case of the Inter Services Intelligence’s (ISI) alleged misuse of secret funds in reference to a petition filed by Tehrik-i-Istiqlal chief Air Martial (retd) Asghar Khan, DawnNews reported.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Tariq Parvez was hearing the case.
Asghar Khan had filed the petition in 1996, accusing the ISI of financing several politicians during the 1990 elections to create the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI) and prevent Benazir Bhutto’s PPP from winning. The ISI allegedly dished out Rs140 million for the purpose. The petition was based on the affidavit of former ISI chief Asad Durrani.
The SC today ordered the Attorney General to present the details of the Intelligence Bureau’s (IB) alleged misuse Rs 290 million within half an hour after the AG informed the court that .the judicial investigative reports relating to Habib Bank and Mehran Bank are missing from the records. A search of these documents is in the process, the AG had said.
The SC also turned down the AG’s request to allow him time till Monday to prepare his response pertaining to IB’s alleged corruption.
The apex court also summoned IB chief Aftab Sultan on an immediate basis.
“If the ex-Army chief and ex-ISI chief can be presented in the court then IB chief is also accountable to the court,” the court remarked.
Appearing before the court, the IB Chief said that he had no knowledge of the alleged funds being issued by the agency.
The agencies deal in cash and not through banks, said Sultan.
Moreover, the agency’s secret files do not hold any records of the purpose of particular funds being used, he added.
Tariq Lodhi was the head of the IB at the alleged time of issuance of the funds in question, the IB chief added.
“Secret funds are meant to be used for national interest, not for being used against democracy,” Chief justice remarked.
The bench subsequently adjourned the hearing till April 23.
“To this day, not a single election in this country has been free and fair,” petitioner Asghar Khan told reporters outside the court premises after the hearing was adjourned.

Rental Power Projects declared illegal by SC

Supreme Court of Pakistan – File Photo

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Friday declared Rental Power Projects (RPPs) as illegal and also ordered them to be shut down, DawnNews reported.
The SC was announcing the verdict of the case of corruption in Rental Power Projects (RPPs) which had already been held in reserve on December 14, 2011.
A two-member bench comprising of the Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Justice Khilji Arif Hussain was hearing the suo motu case.
The apex court said that the rules and regulations were violated in these projects due to which the national exchequer witnessed losses of billions.
Prior to RPPs, the electricity generation system had sufficient potential, but “instead of taking curative steps for its improvement,… billions of rupees were spent on BHIKKI and SHARAQPUR RPPs, which proved complete failures”, read Friday’s verdict.
The verdict further holds the finance ministry, WAPDA, PEPCO and GENCOs responsible for “causing huge losses to the public exchequer, which run into billions of rupees by making 7% to 14% down payments to, and purchasing electricity on higher rates, from RPPs.”
Furthermore, the bench also declares the RPPs “incapable of meeting the demand of electricity on a short term basis.”
Moreover, the SC ordered to initiate proceedings against the Former Water and Power Minister Raja Pervez Asharaf and all others involved in the case.
“The contracts of RPPs are ordered to be rescinded forthwith and all the persons responsible for the same are liable to be dealt with for civil and criminal action in accordance with law”, adds the apex court’s decision.
The verdict adds: “Functionaries of PEPCO, GENCOs, PPIB and NEPRA…who had derived financial benefits from the RPPs contracts…[were] involved in corruption and corrupt practices”, and are also “liable both for civil and criminal action”.
On December 15, 2011, chief justice had taken suo motu notice on applications of Housing Minister Syed Faisal Saleh Hayat and Khwaja Asif who alleged that corruption had been committed in the affairs of the RPPs.
On Novermber 24, 2011, Raja Pervez Asharaf told the court that Pakistan needed an addition of 1200 MW every year as the power requirement would increase to 1,30,000 MW by the year 2030.
Appearing before the two-judge bench, comprising of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Justice Khilji Arif Hussain, the former minister defended himself, saying the country’s power shortage solution was in in hydel power generation and not in thermal which was costly.

University rocked by sex scandal again

ISLAMABAD, March 27: All public and private organisations in the country are required to implement the Sexual Harassment Act but a female university teacher could pick up the courage of reporting her case only after reaching the safety of a foreign land.
Higher Education Commission’s Executive Director Dr Sohail Naqvi confirmed to Dawn that a female faculty member of the Hazara University, currently doing PhD in the United Kingdom, has filed an application with the HEC that she suffered sexual harassment at the university.
“It is a very serious issue. We will take action if the university fails to investigate and act on its own in a given time,” he said.
Initial investigation has shown the charge was correct, according to an HEC official.
“There is a cult in the university and some top officers in its management, deans and female faculty members are involved in the racket,” he said requesting anonymity.
However, the university management, instead of explaining its position, has sought explanation from the complainant for “violating the procedure” by taking her complaint directly to the HEC.
In her application to the HEC, the complainant explained that she had no chance of being heard by the university as a powerful coterie there blocked and dumped such complaints.
She said she was “one of the many victims” of sexual harassment in the Hazara University, which is situated about 20 kilometres from Mansehra.
She got the chance when she arrived in UK on a scholarship and decided to write to the HEC to save other students and faculty members, she said.
Vice-Chancellor Hazara University, Dr Syed Sakhawat Shah was not aware of the incident.
When Dawn pointed him the explanation sought by his university from the complainant, he said it would have been done “in routine” and without his knowledge.
However he promised to look into it.
“After getting her application we decided to countercheck as there could be personal vendetta behind it,” said an HEC official.
“In probing the case, we contacted other female faculty members who confirmed the allegation of the complainant. They said some university officers and faculty members collaborated in the dirty affair,” he added.
Subsequently, the HEC asked the university management investigate the matter itself and report back within six weeks. But the management went seeking an explanation from the ‘victim’ for approaching HEC over its head.
A similar incident had rocked the university’s Haripur campus in 2010 and the accused lecturer was dismissed because of hue and cry in the media.
Meanwhile, the HEC sought help from Dr Fouzia Saeed, who has been working against sexual harassment and has formed a network called AASHA for the purpose. She investigated a similar case in which a top rank officer of the Punjab University was
dismissed.

Banned leaders give tough time to administration

ISLAMABAD, March 27: It may be the ‘high security’ capital of a country grappling with terrorism that is chock-a-block with police, rangers and check posts but Islamabad and its security apparatus proved no match for two banned leaders.
For six hours, Maulana Mohammad Ahmed Ludhianvi, leader of the banned outfit Ahl-i-Sunnat Wal Jamaat (ASWJ) and Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed played a game of cat and mouse with the Islamabad police on Tuesday.
They appeared and disappeared; were stopped and freed; intercepted in their cars and protected by their armed guards, as crowds gathered to watch the spectacle and traffic jams ensued.
Eventually the harassed, red-faced and embarrassed policemen managed to hold Maulana Ludhianvi, only after negotiations and while Saeed escaped.
He was shifted to Industrial area police station and registered a case under PPC section 188 on the complaint of a police officer. Within minutes, however, the city administration granted him bail.
At this point interior minister Rehman Malik intervened and blocked his bail orders.
Maulana Ludhianvi was not released till the filing of this report.
He, along with Hafiz Saeed, had appeared at Parade Ground, defying a ban on their entry into Islamabad, to participate in a
protest and sit-in organised by Defaa-i-Pakistan Council (DFC) against the government’s presumed move to restore Nato supplies.He somehow got information that the capital police and administration were going to arrest them, after which both the leaders disappeared from the Parade Ground. Later Maulana Ludhianvi was spotted at the camp of missing persons’ families while delivering speech.
Secretariat Police SHO, however, intercepted him and held him while he was leaving the camp by saying that “the police are arresting you in connection with the case registered with Margalla police station.” But Maulana Ludhianvi demanded his arrest warrant.
As the police failed to produce the arrest warrant, the activists of ASWJ took their leader away in a Sport Utility Vehicle (SUV).
This led to alerting of the patrolling officers and policemen deployed at the checkpoints. They were asked to check each and every vehicle.
Besides, the police also blocked the slipways and attached roads of main arteries to intercept and arrest Maulana Ludhianvi.
As a result, hundreds of vehicles were stuck up in the worst traffic jam making miles long queues on I.J. Principal Road,
Expressway, Islamabad Highway and Ninth Avenue.
At around 6pm, the vehicle of Maulana Ludhianvi was spotted in the traffic jam on the Ninth Avenue near Industrial Area police station while heading towards Rawalpindi. In response, the police placed blocks and parked their vehicles on the avenue.
All the SHOs, sub-divisional police officers, superintendents of police, were called at the Ninth Avenue along with contingent of Anti-Terrorism Squad, Anti-Riot Unit and police reserves to intercept and arrest the Maulana.
The guards of Maulana Ludhianvi – Punjab Police commandoes – aimed their weapons at the capital police and the officers while the activists cordoned their leader’s vehicle to avoid his arrest.
Later the activists of ASWJ removed the blocks from the road and made the way for their leader. However, the driver of Superintendent of Police City Circle chased the SUV and intercepted it on I.J. Principal Road.
Maulana Ludhianvi again demanded his arrest warrant, but neither the police nor any assistant commissioner or magistrate issued it. Later politician Ijazul Haq, ASWJ’s leader Fazaur Rehman Khalil and Abdullah Gul, son of Hamid Gul, also reached the
spot for negotiation.
In the meantime, Deputy Commissioner Amir Ahmed Ali also reached and thorough negotiations were held between the DC, SSP Yousuf, Mr Haq, Maulana Khalil and Abdullah Gul. After half an hour negotiation Mr Haq, Maulana Khalil and Mr Gul returned
to take Maulana Ludhianvi to police station.
Before leaving the spot Maulana Ludhianvi addressed the activists and asked them to remain there. Till the filling of the report, negotiations were still in progress in the police station.