Blaming the Army isn't the Solution
So guys please go through this post to understand what I meant by the tweet.
1. I intentionally brought up the name of Malik Ishaque despite having full knowledge of his reportire. Let's get this straight that no one is advocating him here. It's just a simple analogy and a very logical one.
2. I still fail to understand how and according to which constitution is his extra judicial killing justified. Just because you,me or Jibran Nasir know that he has murdered someone doesn't justify his extra judicial killing.
Pretty sure Army would say the same about Jibran Nasir's missing persons. "The guy was caught after a gun battle in which 2 Jawans got martyred so we killed him". If your knowledge of someone's crime is good enough for him to be murdered then I trust if Army has knowledge of someone's crimes then they are pretty much entitled to the same rights as you. If you are not protesting against Malik Ishaque's extra judicial killing then you have no right to protest for these guys. Both are exactly same cases.
What if Malik Ishaque's wife turns up on the road tomorrow with a playcard saying where is my husband? Will you support her too because I'm sure she will also be criticising Army for killing her innocent husband. Yes, innocent is the word she'll be using for the guy.
3. For me, these guys who went missing during Zarb e Azb and Rah e Nijaat are as heinous as Malik Ishaque was. They must be doing something wrong as there is peace ever since these individuals have been removed from the ground. And yes this is peace.
All of the above three points were just to explain the analogy which clearly holds true unless you can logically defy it.
Coming back to the solution.
Q- Why do we have extra judicial killings in Pakistan?
Ans- Numerous reasons like personal vendetta, political pressure, acquittal of genuine criminals from Court etc.
Now a big chunk of these killings come from the acquittal of criminals from courts. Do I need to give examples? Molana Aziz of Lal Masjid, Sufi Muhammad of Swat's TTP, Shahrukh Jatoyi, Achakzai guy who killed a policeman in broad daylight and latest of the brightest decisions is the acquittal of Shah Hussain, the guy who stabbed Khadija 23 times. I wouldn't be surprised if these guys get killed extra judicially some day.
Q- Why do court's acquit criminals and terrorists?
Ans-
a) Weak persual by the executive.
b) Insufficient proofs due to out dated methods of investigation and incompetence of investigators. This incompetence can breed from lack of proper facilities or workload.
c) Insecurity among the judges.
These are just few of the reasons.
Q- What is the fallout?
Ans- Imagine being a soldier. You are in Ops area and after a gun battle in which you loose couple of your finest comrades you end up catching a guy in whose house the terrorists had taken shelter for the night. You arrest the guy and send him to the court only to find out that the guy is acquitted after the court didn't see enough proof of his crime.
Few months later, you are in another intelligence based operation and you catch the same guy on the field. What would you do? In an ideal world you should arrest the guy and send him to court once again and maybe he'll get acquitted again. But we aren't living in an ideal world so I think you might pull the trigger on this guy or maybe put him in some cell without having to produce him in front of court.
Now this brings me back to Jibran who by the way happens to be a lawyer. In all this situation, what do you think should the role of a smart, bashaoor lawyer be? Should he be selectively criticising the effect i.e kidnappings etc or should he be working to eliminate the cause i.e help bring reform in our lower judiciary, build capacity of police and investigation institutes.
It has been a very long essay but I guess I needed to explain my logic of the tweet because you guys were taking it in a completely different direction.












