From Pakistan’s perspective, Washington’s demands regarding Dr Shakil Afridi are unwarranted. Afridi is a Pakistani citizen and without doubt, as a government employee he had rendered his services in return for financial benefits to CIA, he was involved in an act of espionage. He therefore must be tried in a Pakistani court according to Pakistani law. Also the US’s habit of cherry picking on laws as it serves its purpose is evident from how vastly different it positions itself on the Aafia case, to the Raymond Davis case and to now Afridi.
In Washington, the Obama administration is being criticized for why it left a CIA asset “high and dry”, why did they not lift him earlier? Analysts claim, as will Obama’s political adversaries that much like the US abandoned its Cuban intelligence assets in the Bay of Pig fiasco, so have they done it with Afridi.
The Congress is arguing against Pakistan trying a man who led the way to finally getting OBL, US’s number one enemy. Now back to Pakistan and to our own law and justice for Afridi. Clearly Afridi was involved with the CIA and was being paid for his services, so there is an espionage case. But espionage against whom? Osama was not, as Pakistani state hopefully correctly states, its asset or under its protection. So Afridi’s act in espionage was not against the State of Pakistan. Also if we read the definition of treason, what Afridi did in leading the CIA up to Osama, he ostensibly committed no treason.
In Pakistan much innocent blood has flown on account of al Qaeda’s terrorist operations. Under its patronage terror networks have repeatedly hit Pakistani citizens and law enforcement agencies. Leading CIA to Osama did however make the Abbotabad Operation happen which caused Pakistan’s sovereignty to be violated but then those who were responsible within Pakistan to locate Osama failed to locate him and need to be taken to task as well. The question of why Afridi would not tell the Pakistani government about Osama and why the CIA is perhaps not a valid question because as a CIA collaborator Afridi followed CIA’s instructions, not lead them to OBL. That the couriers were reportedly doing.
Given these questions it is a gross violation of justice that Afridi be tried under FCR instead of regular law. FCR allows the accused no lawyer, no defence and no evidence produced in his favor. Also technically FIR is to be filed in the location where the crime is committed and that was in Abbotabad not the tribal areas.
Afridi must be provided justice. He must be given a fair hearing. The accusation of treason in this case without a fair hearing and without afdressing the questions raised above seems a miscarriage of justice.
Afridi is not innocent, he was involved with a foreign intelligence agency but as already stated it was a complex issue and hence the nature of his crime needs to be fairly determined. The sentence awarded to his by the Assistant Political Agent is unacceptable from the standards of justice, as laid out in the Constitution of Pakistan. He must be re-tried with the benefit of the defence that is the right of all citizens. It will raise many questions regarding Pakistan’s security perspective and security agencies. And in today’s Pakistan such a debate, responsibly conducted, is important for us to move forward, away from the decades old mess that misguided policies have created for us.
Afridi deserves a fair and regular trial
