Dawn – ISI and its former chiefs enjoy immunity, says US

Washington, 19 December 2012. The US State Department has informed a New York court that Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence and two of its former directors general “enjoy immunity” and cannot be tried in the Mumbai terror attacks case.

“Upon consideration of this matter, and after a full review of the pleadings, the Department of State has determined that defendants Ahmed Shuja Pasha and Nadeem Taj are immune from suit in this case,” said an official letter sent to the US Department of Justice.

The State Department also pointed out that its determination was “not subject to judicial review”.

India, however, rejected the determination, saying that the US affidavit was “a matter of deep and abiding concern” and contradicted Washington’s public commitment to bringing “those responsible for the Mumbai terror attacks to justice”.

Six Americans were among the 166 killed in the Nov 26, 2008, terrorist attacks in the Indian city and later their relatives filed a case in a New York court, listing two former ISI chiefs among the accused.

Lashkar-e-Taiba leaders, Mohammed Hafiz Saeed, Zakiur Rahman, Sajid Mir and Azam Cheema are on the same list.

The complainants claimed that since the ISI was involved in the planning and execution of the attack, Mr Pasha and Mr Taj should be asked to appear before the court.

But on December 17, a State Department legal adviser, Harold Hongju Koh, informed the Department of Justice of its determination that both Mr Pasha and Mr Taj enjoyed immunity and, therefore, could not be called to a court in the United States.

“The residual immunity of a former official is based upon that official’s conduct and extends only to acts that individual took in an official capacity,” explained Mr Koh in a letter addressed to the US Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Stuart Delery.

On December 17, Mr Delery submitted a 12-page affidavit in the court, saying: “In the view of the United States, the Inter-Services Intelligence is entitled to immunity because it is part of a foreign state within the meaning of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.”

The Department of State has also determined that the two former ISI chiefs were also “immune because plaintiffs’ allegations relate to acts that these defendants allegedly took in their official capacities as directors of an entity that is undeniably a fundamental part of the government of Pakistan,” he said.

“Because foreign sovereign immunity and foreign official immunity provide an adequate basis upon which to dispose of this case … the United States takes no position on the political question doctrine issues that are also presented in this case,” he added.

“In making this immunity determination, the United States emphasises that it expresses no view on the merits of plaintiffs’ claims. The United States strongly condemns the terrorist attacks in Mumbai and continues to believe that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan must take steps to dismantle LeT and to support India’s efforts to counter this terrorist threat,” the affidavit said.

A lawyer representing the ISI and its two former chiefs informed the court that the agency was a part of the Pakistani government and functioned under the Ministry of Defence.

The lawyer disagreed with the plaintiffs’ claim that the ISI was “not governed or authorised by Pakistani law” and was “not under the control of the Pakistani government”.

The US executive and legislative branches had “consistently treated the ISI as part of the Government of Pakistan,” the lawyer pointed out.

“The executive branch holds official meetings with representatives of the ISI, issues them diplomatic visas consistent with their status as Pakistani government employees and in all respects recognises the ISI as part of the Government of Pakistan,” the lawyer said.

“Congress likewise has specifically recognised that the ISI is part of the Pakistani government,” he argued.

The attorney also noted that so far no US court had concluded that a component of a foreign state lacked immunity because the foreign state allegedly did not control its actions.

“Plaintiffs’ theory is particularly unusual in the context of an intelligence agency, which, like a foreign ministry or defence ministry, serves a quintessentially sovereign purpose,” he argued.

http://dawn.com/2012/12/20/isi-and-its-former-chiefs-enjoy-immunity-says-us/

Dawn – Pakistan escapes list of states violating religious freedom

By Anwar Iqbal

15 September 2011

Washington. The US State Department has not included Pakistan in a list of eight “countries of particular concern” whose governments have engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom.

The omission, however, angered another federal government agency, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, which demanded on Wednesday to put Pakistan on the list.

The eight countries on the list are Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Uzbekistan.

Assistant Secretary Michael H. Posner, while releasing the annual report on international religious freedom, said the United States was concerned about the blasphemy law in Pakistan, and about the murder of Punjab Governor Salman Taseer and Minorities Minister Shahbaz Bhatti.

“We have great concern about the overall situation of extremism and intolerance in Pakistan, and we stand ready to work with the government to try to address that,” he said.

But USCIRF chairman Leonardo Leo urged the State Department to correct “glaring omissions” of countries like Pakistan which he believed deserved to be on the list.

“Pakistan continues to be responsible for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of freedom of religion or belief. Two high-profile members of the ruling party were assassinated during the reporting period for their advocacy against Pakistan’s repressive blasphemy laws,” said the commission’s report on international religious freedom in 2011.

“In light of these particularly severe violations, USCIRF again recommends in 2011 that Pakistan be designated a country of particular concern.” Since 2002, USCIRF has recommended Pakistan be named a CPC, but the US State Department has not followed that recommendation.

The commission dedicated its 2011 report to the memory of the former Federal Minister for Minorities Affairs, Mr Bhatti.

“Shahbaz was a courageous advocate for the religious freedoms of all Pakistanis, and he was assassinated on March 2 by the Pakistani Taliban for those efforts,” the report noted.

At the State Department briefing, Assistant Secretary Posner noted that the government of Pakistan had not yet reformed a blasphemy law which had been used to prosecute religious minorities and, in some cases, Muslims who promoted tolerance or to settle personal vendettas.

“This year, there have also been several assassinations of those who called for reform of the blasphemy laws, including Governor Taseer and Mr Bhatti, whom Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and I met in February before he was killed,” he said.

Mr Posner, however, pointed out that the government of Pakistan had taken steps to address these rising concerns.

For example, in March, Shahbaz Bhatti’s brother, Paul, was appointed a special adviser on religious minorities to the prime minister.

In July, the government created a ministry of national harmony, which will have oversight for protecting religious minorities at a national level. And in August, President Zardari celebrated National Minorities Day and committed his government to support protection of minority religious rights.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/09/15/pakistan-escapes-list-of-states-violating-religious-freedom.html