“Pakistan could have faced Martial Law”: Interview with Jamaat e Islami chief Siraj-ul-Haq

Had the SC not intervened

The intervention of apex court is a positive step and there is hope that the SC will not give its verdict following the ‘doctrine of necessity’

No one could imagine that Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) Pakistan would ever become relevant in the political landscape of the country in the aftermath of extremely dismal performance in the general elections of May 2013 and controversial statements of its then Amir Syed Munawar Hassan; declaring TTP leader Hakimullah Mehsud a martyr, etc. It was a very disturbing phase for the Jamaat politically as the party received strong backlash from all sections of society and the army asked Hassan to tender an unconditional apology. The bigwigs of JI termed the statements of Hassan as his personal opinion and many political analysts claimed that these two factors played an important role in the ouster of Hassan from the office of Amir.

During the sit-in of Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) and Pakistan Awami Tehrik (PAT) in August 2014, all eyes were on a person named Siraj-ul-Haq — the man who took the reins of Jamaat-e-Islami in March 2014. Haq was the person who made the Jamaat relevant again by holding back-to-back meetings with both ruling and opposition parties in order to calm down the political temperature. He held multiple meetings with the protesting parties as he was made the head of political Jirga by the government. Siraj-ul-Haq held a meeting with the speaker National Assembly Sardar Ayaz Sadiq urging him not to accept the resignations of PTI legislators; otherwise the political temperature would further increase. At that time, the pro-active role of Haq was lauded by both the government and opposition in reducing political tension.

Born to a poor family in a village of Lower Dir (KPK), Haq remained the president of Islami Jamiat Talaba from 1988 to 1991. He became the Member of Provincial Assembly (MPA) from Lower Dir in 2002 and was made the finance minister of KPK. He returned to the provincial assembly in 2013 by contesting election from the same constituency and became a senior minister in the PTI-led coalition government and he had to relinquish his office after taking charge of the Amir of Jamaat-e-Islami. He resigned as MPA from KPK assembly and became a senator of Pakistan in 2015.

Siraj-ul-Haq is among four petitioners who have moved the Supreme Court demanding thorough investigation of Panama Leaks and the case is being heard in the apex court these days. DNA talked exclusively with the Amir of Jamaat-e-Islami Siraj-ul-Haq in a bid to know the future of Panama Leaks.

Question: You played the role of mediator between the government and opposition during last sit-in of Islamabad in 2014. The sit-in was averted this time by the intervention of the Supreme Court. How do you see the political arena this time around as the case of Panama Leaks is being heard in the apex court?

Siraj-ul-Haq: In civilised societies, decisions are not taken on the roads or roundabouts as there are several institutions to decide the fate of national issues. There was a possibility of Martial Law had the Supreme Court not intervened timely. A sign of maturity was depicted by all sides and bloodshed was prevented with the decision of the apex court. The prosperity of the country is in the continuity of democracy and the system should not be derailed. The intervention of apex court is a positive step and there is hope that the SC will not give its verdict following the ‘doctrine of necessity’.

Q: You are a petitioner in the case of Panama Leaks. What are your expectations from the Supreme Court (SC)? In your opinion, how should SC proceed in this case?

SuH: JI was the first party that approached the apex court in this case and we have been working tirelessly against the monster of corruption and ill-gotten money. This Judicial Commission (JC) headed by the SC judge must not be a toothless commission and this JC must submit its report to the apex court instead of giving it to the government. All the investigative institutions including National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and Federal Investigating Agency (FIA) must work under the supervision of this commission to probe the case. We have also given a time-frame of 25 days to probe the case as the country cannot afford more time to investigate it.

It is wrong to claim that the Supreme Court has itself intervened to end the political impasse as the apex court took an important decision after the filing of petitions by the politicians and it is a right forum to decide such cases

Q: Some ministers of the government accused the Chief Minister of Khyber Pkhtunkhwa (KPK) Parvez Khattak of launching an attack on the federal capital. A resolution has been submitted in the National Assembly demanding a treason case against him. You are a coalition partner of his government in KPK; how do you see the recent act of Khattak?

SuH: It was a very disturbing moment for Pakistan as two federating units were at loggerheads with each other at the border of Punjab and KPK. A heavy amount of tear gas was fired at unarmed protesters despite the fact that protest is a democratic right of everyone. Islamabad is a part of Pakistan and Khattak is an honourable citizen of this country. No force can stop him from entering Islamabad. Democratic norms do not allow any government to launch a crackdown against political workers.

Q: What should be the Terms of References (TORs) for this commission? In your opinion, should Nawaz Sharif resign from the office of prime minister even before the verdict of this commission?

SuH: Wherever the issue of Panama Leaks surfaced in the world, the specific rulers of countries, who were compromised, resigned to face the accountability process. Nawaz Sharif should also resign from his office to face accountability and nominate any other person from the party as prime minister. Sharif can come to the office again after being exonerated. As far as the TORs are concerned, we are trying to file joint and unanimous TORs from the opposition side and I am in contact with the PTI and Awami Muslim League of Sheikh Rasheed in this regard. JI will not let the issue of Panama Leaks die as corruption has deeply been rooted in our rulers and their accountability is the need of the hour.

Q: You frequently say that these rulers are corrupt, plunderers and dishonest. Then why does JI make alliances with these corrupt plunderers in the elections as it was seen that JI supported PML-N in several elections including AJK polls, Jehlum by-elections and local government polls in Lahore?

SuH: In AJK polls, the decision to support PML-N was made by our local leadership of AJK as that ‘Shura’ is solely independent to make the decision by keeping in view the ground realities of that area. For Jehlum by polls, JI did not support PML-N as it was the decision of an individual of the party.

Q: Why is interference of the army always referred to as intervention of the ‘third force’? Don’t you think that the intervention of SC is also an interference by a ‘third force’? Why are these issues not resolved in the parliament?

SuH: It is wrong to claim that the Supreme Court has itself intervened to end the political impasse as the apex court took an important decision after the filing of petitions by the politicians and it is a right forum to decide such cases. Yes, the lawmaking body is parliament and it has a law that no corrupt and plunderer can become its member but we have seen that the issue of Panama Leaks is not resolved by the parliament even after seven months. I am sure that the issue of Panama Leaks will be resolved amicably by the highest court of the land.

Q: Do you think that all the opposition parties are on the same page over the Judicial Commission? In the past, Imran Khan has raised questions on the JC after its verdict on election rigging. If this JC does not satisfy Khan and he comes on the roads again, what will be the political scenario then?

SuH: It was an ideal situation and all the opposition parties were supposed to be on the same page but unfortunately Pakistan People’s Party has distanced itself from this Judicial Commission. Although we have filed separate petitions in the apex court we are still trying to fight jointly in the court and contacts have been made with PTI and AML in this regard. JI will accept the verdict of JC but I cannot say anything about Imran Khan’s reaction after the judgement made by the commission.