ISLAMABAD: The Chairperson of Defence of Human Rights, Amina Masood Janjua, was left depressed and disheartened when the Supreme Court observed on Monday that it should not be pushed to tread beyond its defined jurisdiction that might shore up tension between institutions and pitch them against each other.
"The Supreme Court has taken quite a lenient view in the missing persons’ cases but such matter cannot be seen outside the purview of the law and the constitution," observed a three-judge bench headed by Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali.
The court was hearing the case of long missing Masood Janjua, husband of Ms Amina.
The information laid before the court about reluctance of the UNHCR to allow a star witness to record his evidence through video link in the case from abroad also dampened Ms Amina’s expectation in addition to the changing of the bench because of unavailability of the one headed by Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja.
At the last hearing on March 13, the bench headed by Justice Khawaja had directed its Data Processing Manager Umar Suleman to make arrangements to record through video link the statement of Dr Imran Munir, who is living in a UNHCR camp in Kandy, Sri Lanka. He is listed at Serial No 53 of the UNHCR list as an asylum seeker.
Dr Munir had expressed his willingness in an email message to record the statement.
On Monday, when the case was taken up an IT expert was waiting in the courtroom for the direction to ready the video link but Additional Advocate General of Punjab Razzaq A. Mirza informed the bench that the UNHCR authorities had not allowed the recording of the statement.
According to Amina Janjua, Dr Munir had written in a diary that he had heard about a businessman from Rawalpindi called Masood Janjua when he was under detention somewhere at the Westridge, Rawalpindi.
Mr Mirza explained that the Superintendent of Police, Photohar, Rawalpindi, Haroon Joya, had gone to Kandy to record the statement of Dr Munir on the court’s directive but the latter declined to meet any officer deputed on behalf of the Pakistan government since he did not trust any of them.
Previously also the Punjab police had told the court that the privacy laws and the international conventions under which the UNHCR operates did not permit it to share any information about any individual listed with it or the agency for asylum or someone residing inside its camps.
If we ignored the statement of Dr Munir, the case would automatically come to naught, Mr Mirza argued, adding that former ISI director general (internal) retired Maj Gen Nusrat Naeem in his June 13, 2011 statement before the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances (CIED) had categorically claimed that Masood Janjua was killed by non-state actors for allegedly playing the role of a double agent.
When the court drew his attention to Dr Munir’s claim that he had heard about Mr Janjua during his captivity, Mr Mirza explained that the doctor himself had backtracked from his statement before the joint investigation team, adding that the case had been dragging for nine years without any result.
The court observed that it would continue hearing the case even if there was a slight hope about the recovery of Mr Janjua, but what the court could do if Dr Munir himself was not forthcoming.
Ms Amina drew the attention of the bench that of 11 witnesses she had listed before the court, Lt Gen Shafqat Ahmed, Lt Gen Nadeem Taj and Col Habibullah still had not submitted their affidavits, so they should be summoned for cross-examination. The court declared her request as inappropriate explaining that other witnesses, including former president Pervez Musharraf, had already submitted their statements denying having information about the whereabouts of Mr Janjua.
On a court query, Ms Amina admitted that she would have no objection if the requirement of Dr Munir’s statement was done away but was told to pursue her matter before the CIED by submitting an application before it.
The court adjourned the hearing for an indefinite period.
Talking to reporters after the proceedings, Ms Amina said the change of the bench had already made her suspicious. Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja should have heard the case because he was well conversant with it, she added.