Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
^ I dont think they will release him now, a lot has happened during the past year. I feel that even the military is fed up with the "fake relationship" between the two countries. At the moment the acts of both countries seem to be tit for tat.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
You are right. In Pakistan people make decisions on personal biases without standard and jump to conclusions without background knowledge. Let see why Afridi went for OBL and why Afridi was tried in FATA.
Afridi turned against Taliban (and AQ) for personal revenge. He used to treat wounded Taliban leaders until 2008. No doubt he sued to charge hefty fees from them, but then he was doing something illegal and if caught could have been in prison. Anyhow, if he was only after money then he would have become informer on them too, but he did not.
[Actually, one can say that all who were/are colluding with Taliban and AQ by treating them, donating money to them, sympathising with them, or assisting them are traitors, as Pakistan is fighting Taliban and AQ. Anyhow if we start hunting such traitors then we would find millions in Pakistan]
Totally agreed. :) I guess, we should be happy they did not hang them guy for treason. For what it's worth they should have sentenced him to 5, 10 years for helping the foreign powers, just to be politically correct and as a token sentence. In a perfect world he shouldn't have been tried at all, but then again, in a perfect world he would have just reported Osama to the Pakistan government, and they'd have taken action.
No scratch that, in a perfect world, Pakistan government/military intelligence wouldn't even have allowed Osama into the country, and if he was there, sniffed him out themselves and served justice.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
And now white house:
Dunya News: Pakistan:-Dr Afridi not acted against Pakistan: White house…
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
I shall use another analogy here:
Let's say your brother is serial killer/rapist and he is on the loose. He will continue to rape and kill others unless he is apprehended. The police want to capture him but your mother refuses to do all in her power to bring her son to justice because he is her son.
If you (the brother/sister) tip the police in order to have your killer sibling captured - are you being disloyal to your mother who has protected her criminal son or are you looking to serve the good of the larger society?
Personally, I would hand my sibling over to the police myself - because while I adore my mother and would want to do all that is in my power to protect her pride and dignity, more important to me is protecting the lives of innocents.
Should the consequence for doing the right thing be losing my mother's love? I would hope not - but that is for her to decide - just as it is for Pakistan to decide whether protecting it's pride is more important.
Laws does not work on analogies. Law of the land is that if you work for foreign secret service, you are a traitor. Period. Law never differentiate b/w working for Foreign secret service for good cause or bad cause.
and this is not law of Pakistan, this is pretty much law in every country. US its self has convicted Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard, (Israel btw is closest friend of USA). He got life in prison for working for Israeli spy agency.
If we allow people (or let them off the hook) because they breached the law for "good cause" we will have 1000s of Robin hoods roaming on street of Lahore and Karachi.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
Laws does not work on analogies. Law of the land is that if you work for foreign secret service, you are a traitor. Period. Law never differentiate b/w working for Foreign secret service for good cause or bad cause.
and this is not law of Pakistan, this is pretty much law in every country. US its self has convicted Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard, (Israel btw is closest friend of USA). He got life in prison for working for Israeli spy agency.
If we allow people (or let them off the hook) because they breached the law for "good cause" we will have 1000s of Robin hoods roaming on street of Lahore and Karachi.
Are you trying to equate spies equal, who spy against the interest of their own country and those who are spying on interest that is nothing to do with interest of their own country?
For instance, Afridi was spying on foreign national (OBL) and his spying was nothing to do with harming interest of Pakistan (actually, his spying was in accordance with Pakistani official interest) ... and Israeli spy was spying in USA against the interest of USA.
Anyhow, if you mean that a person spying for another country is traitor regardless of that person is spying against the interest of his country or on objectives that is nothing to do with harming his country, then all British citizens who spied for Pakistan during Nawaz period (1997-99) to find properties and financial interest of Zardari in UK must be traitor, and UK should punish them as traitor, right?
And all British, Canadian and American citizens of Pakistani origin who spied to locate Pakistanis during Musharraf period who fled to USA, Canada and UK after doing financial corruption in Pakistan (during pre 1999 period of Nawaz and BB), and reported their whereabouts to Pakistan Musharraf government (NAB), must be traitor too and those respective countries should prosecute them as traitor, right?
Remember, Admiral Mansurul Haq fled to USA and after finding his whereabouts (through Pakistanis and American spy company 'Broadsheet' in USA) Pakistan Musharraf government NAB extradited him to Pakistan from USA and made him pay $7.5 million to Pakistan in plea bargaining. So, those American and American Pakistanis who helped Pakistan locate Admiral mansurul Haq (and many other) are traitors in your view?
And similarly, in your view those British Pakistanis who located Zardari Rockwood palace and have also located Nawaz several flats and other properties of Zardari, Nawaz are all traitors?
During Musharraf period, Pakistan ‘NAB’ employed American spy company ‘Broadsheet’ and handed them names of around 250 wanted corrupt bureaucrats and politicians to locate them. Pakistan also hired British firms for the purpose.
So, according to you, all those who spied for Pakistan to locate Pakistani wanted corrupts were traitors, Right?
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
One must read about Cuban five who were spying against cuban terrorists and imprisoned by american government…
Document - USA: Amnesty International seeks review of case of the
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
^ there are two flaws in this news:
First of all the Americans consider Cuba as a foe, hence the people acting against the government (of Cuba) are good guys. Now if someone is spying against the good guys is an enemy, as far as Pakistan is concerned both countries are supposedly allies and fighting against the same enemy. Hence what Pakistan has done is wrong.
Secondly and more importantly they are American and we are Pakistan, faraq saaf zaagir hay… 
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
Spying against Cuban freedom fighters (or Cuban terrorists) was against the official interest of USA, and thus the person spying was spying against the official interest of USA, so USA can classify them as traitors if they were Americans.
But if someone was spying on people about whom America has no national interest or their spying do not harm American (official) interest, than those spying won’t be considered traitors or their action illegal.
For instance, if Afridi spying on OBL was against official interest of Pakistan then one can say that Afridi was working against Pakistan and thus can be prosecuted as traitor. But as the thing was, Pakistan itself was looking for OBL and to spy on OBL was not against Pakistan (official) interest, hence Afridi cannot be considered as doing anything illegal.
Actually, Afridi action was similar to what American spy firm ‘Broadsheet’ did for Pakistan in USA, locating Pakistani wanted corrupts in USA and reporting their whereabouts to Pakistan.
For instance, if I am living in USA and you want to locate me than you can take help of your American friend or hire American firm to locate me. Well, if you want to know what I am doing in USA than you can ask your friend or hire someone to do spying on me. In both cases, America would not prosecute your friend or people you employed on spying charges … because in both cases your friend or firm you hired are not hurting American national interest.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
Are you trying to equate spies equal, who spy against the interest of their own country and those who are spying on interest that is nothing to do with interest of their own country?
Its good that you have this as first sentence, I do not need to read anymore :) (j/k I read it anyway, and you are trying to make same point over and over)
I said once law is broken, punishment does not depend on the fact that it was broken for good cause (or good intent) or bad.
Will work in bollywood movies but not in reality.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
^^^ Yar ... I think either you do not want to understand or lack understanding. :)
What I am writing is that ‘LAW WAS NOT BROKEN’ by Afridi and I believe that is why Afridi was not tried in Pakistani courts but through Jirga in FATA, without lawyers representing Afridi or Afridi defending himself. If Afridi was tried in Pakistani court, he would have been free, as no court would have given him any sentence. Throughout, what I wrote is that:
Law would have got broken if Afridi was spying against Pakistan (against the interest of Pakistan government) ... but Afridi was not.
To work for foreign country is allowed in every country, and that is the reason people could work in embassies of foreign countries or even in multinationals. People can also fulfil their duties at work for foreign countries, including spying on civilians and organisations. These employees do that for various reasons, including issue of visa. They can also spy on different organisations as sometime they need to, so that country’s embassy they are working could evaluate these organisations for various purposes. They can also spy to locate someone who may have done crime in their employers’ country.
That means, as long as they are not spying on their own country (National interest of that country), then they are not breaking any law (and that applies everywhere in the world).
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
Laws does not work on analogies. Law of the land is that if you work for foreign secret service, you are a traitor. Period. Law never differentiate b/w working for Foreign secret service for good cause or bad cause.
and this is not law of Pakistan, this is pretty much law in every country. US its self has convicted Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard, (Israel btw is closest friend of USA). He got life in prison for working for Israeli spy agency.
If we allow people (or let them off the hook) because they breached the law for "good cause" we will have 1000s of Robin hoods roaming on street of Lahore and Karachi.
I said once law is broken, punishment does not depend on the fact that it was broken for good cause (or good intent) or bad.
Interesting how upholding the law has become a priority for Pakistan all of a sudden...where is this fervour for every other victim of a crime or against every other abuser of the law?
My issue is that the principles that they claim to be upholding through the conviction and sentencing of Afridi are selective and convenient, and to me it is an act of international posturing. I get realpolitiks and the constant battle for balance of power - but in this example here, it's form over substance and reaks of hypocrisy and I can't respect it and I can't support it.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
Interesting how upholding the law has become a priority for Pakistan all of a sudden...where is this fervour for every other victim of a crime or against every other abuser of the law?
My issue is that the principles that they claim to be upholding through the conviction and sentencing of Afridi are selective and convenient, and to me it is an act of international posturing. I get realpolitiks and the constant battle for balance of power - but in this example here, it's form over substance and reaks of hypocrisy and I can't respect it and I can't support it.
This is the sad issue with our mindset. Whenever something good is happened (upholding of law in this case), we complain why justice is served when so many injustices are in the society. But cry a river out on injustices in the society and feel angry that there is no justice left, for the rest of our lives. This is more likely a classic case of hypocrisy than selective justice, which still is justice and must be appreciated.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
^^^ Actually, Afridi was not convicted from any court so we cannot say that Afridi got convicted (in true sense). Afridi got convicted by 5 member Jirga where Afridi was not even given any proper chance of defence.
If Pakistan government wanted to get Afridi convicted from Pakistani courts on any ground related to tracking down OBL and reporting to USA, then Pakistan government would have needed to convince judges of court that Afridi worked against the interest of Pakistan (interest that is not what Pakistani government secretly wanted unofficially, but interest that Pakistan government was claiming that they were following officially). Since Pakistan government could not have done that, they tried Afridi in FATA using Jirga method, even though what happened was not in FATA but in Abbotabad.
Anyhow, I believe Afridi would appeal (if he has any sense) in Peshawar high court, challenging the verdict of Jirga that he was working against state (or waging war against state). I am sure that no one can prove in court that he was working against Pakistan, and thus I believe he would go free (unless muk-muka happens in court too).
Here is report of Afridi trial:
On Wednesday, officials said the surgeon had been convicted and jailed for 33 years under the archaic tribal justice system that has governed Pakistan’s semi-autonomous tribal belt since British colonial rule. A jail official said Afridi was being held in a private cell with extra security, with paramilitary and commandos deployed outside. Earlier yesterday, jail official Samad Khan said Afridi was in poor health and being kept away from other prisoners to avert any danger to his life. A court operating under the Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR), which date back to the 19th century, found him guilty of waging war against the state. Afridi comes from Khyber, one of the seven districts that make up the tribal belt.
But critics said he should not have been tried under tribal law for an alleged crime that took place outside tribal jurisdiction, in the town of Abbottabad where he ran a fake vaccination program designed to collect bin Laden family DNA. A senior official in Khyber, Nasir Khan, defended Afridi’s trial. “We have powers to try a resident of FATA (the federally administered tribal areas) under the FCR enforced in tribal areas,” he told AFP. “The trial was kept secret so that no one can attack him. We did not reveal even the name of the jirga members to avoid any risk.” There have been conflicting accounts about whether Afridi was present during the proceedings.
Nasir Khan said he had appeared on Wednesday when the verdict was announced in Peshawar. Under the FCR, cases are heard by a five to seven-member jirga, or council of tribal elders, **along with two officials from the local political administration,**he explained. Khan said Afridi’s trial lasted two months and that he was given full opportunity to defend himself, but was not entitled to a lawyer. Afridi’s punishment was meted out under the Pakistani penal code, Khan said. He has the right to appeal either to a tribunal or directly to the Peshawar high court, which has in several cases either remitted or annulled tribal sentences, he added. The tribunal is made up of three former senior civil servants. – AFP
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
This is the sad issue with our mindset. Whenever something good is happened (upholding of law in this case), we complain why justice is served when so many injustices are in the society. But cry a river out on injustices in the society and feel angry that there is no justice left, for the rest of our lives. This is more likely a classic case of hypocrisy than selective justice, which still is justice and must be appreciated.
Selective justice is not justice - it is perversion of justice when the laws are not applied equally to all. It shows that even the judicial process which is supposed to be above and outside of the government can be used as a political tool to flex political muscles and support political agendas.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
This is the sad issue with our mindset. Whenever something good is happened (upholding of law in this case), we complain why justice is served when so many injustices are in the society. But cry a river out on injustices in the society and feel angry that there is no justice left, for the rest of our lives. This is more likely a classic case of hypocrisy than selective justice, which still is justice and must be appreciated.
I am crying on injustice, not justice.
Problem with some Pakistanis is that when injustices happen in Pakistan that they might like (according to their understanding and believe) they feel happy and do not raise their voices, rather some even appreciate that injustice calling it justice. On the other hand when justice really happens (as action against Mullahs of Lal-Masjid terrorising civilians ... or action against Akbar Bugti's armed challenge to state) people start crying that it was injustice.
To me, people who are defending victimisation of Afridi are showing their hypocrisy or lack of their understanding law. Maybe their motive is to side with state if state acted that antagonised USA (due to their hate towards USA ... even though they might not hate to work or study there), but in the end for their such feelings they are willing to accept that an innocent Pakistani gets victimised.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
Selective justice is not justice - it is perversion of justice when the laws are not applied equally to all. It shows that even the judicial process which is supposed to be above and outside of the government can be used as a political tool to flex political muscles and support political agendas.
Sister, what happened was not even selective justice, but it was injustice.
Anyhow, you are right that Pakistanis are hypocrite in most cases. For instance:
Those Pakistanis who loot Pakistan and/or take Pakistani wealth outside Pakistan (claiming it as theirs ... regardless of they acquired those wealth legally or illegally) harms Pakistan more than anyone could and thus are real traitors to Pakistan, but they are allowed to rule Pakistan with all respect, honour and privileges.
Similarly, those who after qualification love to serve foreign countries for money even when Pakistan needs their services; they harm country and wellbeing of country, and thus are traitor too (in some respect), but are considered respectable citizen.
On the other hand, state punishes those who may have done no harm to Pakistan or even served Pakistan, and some people in Pakistan would appreciate that.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
Interesting how upholding the law has become a priority for Pakistan all of a sudden...where is this fervour for every other victim of a crime or against every other abuser of the law?
My issue is that the principles that they claim to be upholding through the conviction and sentencing of Afridi are selective and convenient, and to me it is an act of international posturing. I get realpolitiks and the constant battle for balance of power - but in this example here, it's form over substance and reaks of hypocrisy and I can't respect it and I can't support it.
two wrong do not make a right. really.
What do you suggest that till we have uniform justice in the country, we should let go all killers, traitors, mafias etc? What if tomorrow some murderer says that there is selective justice in the country, please let me go off the hook too?
I am totally against selective justice too but that can not be the base of argument to let people get off.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
I think it’s Good that he has been convicted through FCR as people should know about this black law, this law is one of the reason of creation of ttp. Can you imagine the situation of people who have gone through 10 years of warfare in presence of these laws? It’s good to see that some people condemning the use of fcr against one man but no one is worried about the same laws being used against whole tribes during the past 10 years and hence forcing them towards militancy. According to the same laws collective punishments are given to tribes, for example if there are a few criminals in a tribe the whole tribe is punished, worst example of state persecution and terrorism and then we wonder from why the state cannot control the menace.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
two wrong do not make a right. really.
What do you suggest that till we have uniform justice in the country, we should let go all killers, traitors, mafias etc? What if tomorrow some murderer says that there is selective justice in the country, please let me go off the hook too?
I am totally against selective justice too but that can not be the base of argument to let people get off.
Pakistani already lets murderers and rapists go free, so there's nothing new there except they don't even need to claim selective justice to be let off the hook. Source, sifarish and rishwat are enough to accomplish that end :)
Don't get me wrong, I'm not supporting that law and order be abandoned outright - but motivations need to be examined. Like I said before this wasn't the conviction of a traitor - this is political posturing at it's worst because it shows Pakistan's weaknesses and not it's strengths.
Re: Dr Afridi gets 33 years imprisonment
HRCP calls for a fair trial of Dr Shakil Afridi – The Express Tribune
I haven’t seen even a single statement from HRCP regarding the state sponsored trial of the government against the tribals in the so co called war on terror during the past 10 years, why the sudden contempt for the laws that are existing in Fata for 64 years?