ISLAMABAD: Federal Investigation Authority (FIA) has once again pleaded Supreme Court of Pakistan for closing the Asghar Khan implementation case, saying that running case on insufficient evidence is impossible.
A three-judge bench of the Apex Court headed by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa took up the case today (Monday).
As the hearing went outset, FIA submitted its replies as directed by the court.
In its reply, FIA tabled its point of view on the proceedings of the case amid ‘lack of evidence’.
“Statements were recorded of all witnesses including the probe into Benami accounts. Interviews of two journalists of Television channels were also taken by the Inquiry committee whereas prime witness Brigadier (retd.) Hamid Saeed and Advocate Yousuf Memon were also quizzed”, FIA’s reply stated.
“However, solid evidence are yet to be found for further trial”, reply added.
Earlier on April 02, Supreme Court of Pakistan sought a supplementary report from the Federal Investigation Authority (FIA) having details of the use of bank accounts.
During the hearing, CJP Khosa questioned the Director of Legal Affairs of the Ministry of Defence Brig: Falak Naz that did you submitted the report consist of the details of banks accounts.
To this, the Director of Legal Affairs told the court that the report was submitted on March 16.
At this, the honourable justice Azmat Saeed in his remarks said that the submitted report was incomplete and asked to submit a detailed report.
The honourable judge expressed displeasure over the FIA and told that the court will not close the court and ordered the intelligence agency to submit the detailed report on next hearing and adjourned the case’s hearing till April 22.
BACKGROUND OF ASGHAR KHAN CASE
Around 20 years back, late Asghar Khan filed a human rights petition backing retired Gen Naseerullah’s allegations that ISI had purchased the loyalties of certain politicians to manipulate the 1990 general election.
Later, retired Gen Asad Durrani confirmed those accusations before the Supreme court of Pakistan.
In his affidavit, he admitted that he played a role in manipulating the 1990 general elections. He also named the other players and elaborated on how the scheme unfolded.
Notwithstanding this shocking revelation, the case languished until 2012 when the Supreme Court handed down a landmark verdict that had the potential of redrawing the political and institutional landscape along democratic lines.
Yet there has been no accountability thus far, either for those who administered the slush fund, nor its recipients.
