Shah Fahad
THE news of amendment in the Army Act has been around for some time and quite recently opposition parties have started blaming PTI for secretly approving amendment and have questioned their loyalty by saying they are giving NRO to an Indian Spy. The way this news has been moving around in circles does sound like the government is giving some kind of a pardon to spy and do not want it to attract much attention. However, these claims are wrong factually and logically, nothing more than a political stunt used by opposition parties to make some noise.
Pakistan captured Kulbhushan Jadhav, a RAW handler from Balochistan during a counterintelligence operation. Kulbhushan had fake passports and was spending his life in Iran using an alias. He made several visits to Karachi and Balochistan under the radar and provided financial and operational support to different non-state actors. His main objective was to destabilize peace in the country and sabotage CPEC. He confessed to the security agencies and on video, which was made public that he is a serving naval officer in Indian Navy and was working for Research & Analysis Wing (RAW).
Indian administration refused to have any links with Jadhav and stated that he took early retirement and was abducted from Iran. Since he was a serving military officer, Pakistan trialed him in the military court, where he was convicted of his crimes. India took the case to International Court of Justice where they demanded the annulment of the death sentence from the Pakistani military court and safe passage to India. ICJ voted in favour of the decision made by the military court and advised Pakistan to review and reconsider the sentence according to Pakistan’s justice system, allowing counsellors access to Kulbhushan.
Pakistan’s military act forbade anyone to file an appeal in the civilian court against the decisions. To comply with the instructions of ICJ, Pakistan decided to amend the military act. Since Pakistan has solid pieces of evidence to prove that he is guilty, therefore, it is not the matter of pardoning his sentence rather giving him the chance to appeal in the civilian court about the conviction. Logically Pakistan has to comply with the ICJ instructions.
Farogh Naseem, Law Minister also clarified the position by stating that the ordinance does not mean to provide Jadhav amnesty from the death sentence. He added that if Pakistan does not adhere to the instructions from the ICJ of providing him with counsellor access, India can take the matter up to the United Nations and ICJ again. Interestingly same opposition parties showed no interest regarding this case during their regimes.
If giving leniency to the India spy is an act of being traitor then historically we released Kashmir Singh to India who was pardoned by Gen. Musharraf. The death sentence of Sarabjit Singh was converted to life in prison by the then President Asif Ali Zardari. Sarabjit Singh was later killed in his prison cell from the hands of other inmates, which was not a proud incident. When Pakistan captured Shakil Afridi, the US government praised his efforts and offered Pakistan to exchange Shakil Afridi for Afia Siddiqui but the government refused to do so. Prime Minister Imran Khan presented the same offer during his official visit to the US.
Sepoy Maqbool Hussain, a Pakistani soldier was captured by the Indian military during the 1965 war but they didn’t register his status as a war prisoner and tortured him for nearly four decades. To avoid such situations countries exchange prisoners and spies. During the cold war, both Soviets and Americans exchanged many such prisoners. The exchange of Rudolf Abel, a Russian spy for an American U2 pilot Gary Powers and Frederic Pryor was the most prominent event in history. The US government allowed Abel to defend his case in the court, which ultimately led to the exchange rather a death penalty in which case it would be useless for the US government.
Giving counsellors access to Jadhav and allowing him to appeal in the civil court does not show our weakness rather the strength and depth of our judicial system. It will not only bring us in compliance with ICJ instructions but will also show that we gave the Indian spy a fair chance to present his case. This by far does not mean that the government has turned against the country and therefore must not be criticized blindly.
—The writer is freelance columnist.
