It is such a fine pleasure to have you on the board with evergreen vocabulary of judicial script which always fascinated me since the day I started understanding the sights and scenes of the beauty of the skill as excellence.

Reverting to the topic of controversial destiny, I still feel thirst to know your kind opinion with reference to the issue, as per your gathered info, though I have an impression as reflection that you being a professional lawyer are inquisitive on the very principle stand of ,

“Audi alter am par tem……… No man shall be condemned unheard”.

“Agreed”

Who can deny the fact that “justice shall prevail”

But this term, “justice” is not at all restricted to the grievant or petitioner only, respondents, have due relaxation to enjoy the term as well.

Sir, my stress point to initiate discussion is still the same.

What is your conclusive preliminary assessment on the issue being a lawyer with as far collected or available data, as gathered information of the suspect or a victim, so to reach a probable fair trial of the case as unbias, non prejudice verdict accepted to the populace at large or if not to our self so to isolate the thoughts that what is done was a menace rather to guilt on the issue through out rest of the life?

As far as my opinion on the issue is concerned I have reached and preliminary concluded the probable theory of the said event and in no way award clemency to the suspect for her defined activities that has been cited in various articles as far.

Though ,she still hold the stagnant and awarded element of “suspicion” as ever, by virtue ,as designed by the law for any allegation..

Amicus please see this is assertive data based exclusive debugging of the crime so to isolate and ease the thoughts other then emotions or bindings as humanly issues.

Amicus! This practice as handing and taking of personalities in terms of allegation and conspiracies and even as spy was never a unique and one time concept in Pakistan or any where in the world.

This practice in Pakistan also became the chapter of discussion previously when similar sibling in terms of criminal offence were charged and framed on well known criminal Amil Kansi, who was then handed over to USA by then, functionaries and administrators.

We being Pakistani got to understand.

We are not some country like criminals who can afford and litigate sovereignty just because of insane activities of one single individual.

Forget about Dr Afia, she might be innocent, though I don’t agree, but there are hundreds of such captives being wrongly convicted in Indians and other jails throughout the world, sometimes, for their wrong doings and sometimes because of their bearing in terms of nationality as Pakistani, as we see in India where hundreds of brothers and sisters are under captivity and extreme of similar habeas and violating Audi alter am par tem theory.

Amicus, point of concerned again become the key point of discussion, was she involve or not?

In my opinion it is the point where discussion would take its final destined flight.

Now to isolate and tag the women as noble at my end, I would leave the discussion blaming the retainer and people who have executed the desire.

Though on the contrary, if I frame the charge on detainee, new chapter of discussion would open so to frame the legality or illegality of the case.

Amicus litigations that gains international, attention should be processed with professional attitude and skill.

General populace have emotional element which always incapacitate the issue in wrong perception.

Amicus as far as your questionnaire is concerned regarding clarification of few posed inquisitions, I being in military service and after long term affiliated affluence in bureaucratic environment by virtue of my family background, I have gone through as professional experience, the requisite criteria of very such confiscation that becomes part and parcel of individual.

High profile captives have special mandatory criterion of captivity internationally.

Under no circumstances such captives are being disclosed to appear on the platform of exposure or an irrational and untoward blame game always become the pending upcoming scene.

This is not a new concept and you by your expertise, is very much familiar with the theme and we routinely observed such interactive situation when spies and high profile criminals are interrogated.

Anti state high profile suspects with international activities are hazardous to states and when such individuals are subjugated with framed charges have defined protocol of inquiry and place and is under the domain of state and under undefined privacy.

It’s an ethical practice in the book of inquiry and routine practice in the field of interrogation.

I think this can not be the subject of inquisition as the custody with declared tenure of absence has been owned by the retainers.

Yes! As to the custody and illegal detention of the kids are concerned, the 3 are American citizens, and are under the rule and legislative dominancy of American sovereign.

Under no law and means, we can claim to deposit as requisite, the ware about of the inmates as legal heir.

As to the issue of free trial, there is again a promissory estoppels in the books of offence and modes of interrogation that such pledges are only entertained at the level of the state, when state consider urge to validate the crime as punishment, otherwise state has prerogative to keep the custody in the name of integrity and essential sovereignty as far as state consider the same as essential. Regards

One recognises from your very detailed ‘discourses’ the real motivation of your pain. It is not the sympathy for this lady (Ms. Siddiqui) that you write, but the extreme antipathy for former President Musharraf that compels you in this undertaking. Is it a tradition of the land that every “amicus” carries a dagger to stab, an axe f his own to grind? I just wonder, how many more enemies are around behind the veils of friendship presenting themselves as ‘amicus’.

Former President Mr. Pervez Musharraf, in his biography, “IN THE LINE OF FIRE”, in chapters 22, “The War Comes to Pakistan”, 23, “Manhunt” and 24, “Tightening the Noose”, while dealing with the network and activities of Al-Qaeda and its allies in Pakistan, referring to Al-Qaeda members, boasts: “We have captured 689 and handed 369 to the United States. We have earned bounties totaling millions of dollars. Those who habitually accuse us of ‘not doing enough’ in the war on terror should simply ask the CIA how much prize money it has paid to the government of Pakistan.” (p. 237)

Since Musharraf has time and again been accused of hunting with the hound and running with the hare, perhaps, he wanted to dispel the impression that he is not fully committed to war on terror.
However, the assertion that, a huge prize money was received by the Pakistan government, led to embarrassment for the American CIA, the State Department, White House and the Pakistan government. Pakistan had to clarify that the money was paid to individuals whose information led to arrest of Al-Qaeda elements. Commenting on Musharraf’s disclosure about the number of people handed over to the United States; one detractor of Musharraf has said that he should have given the title of “In the Line of Hire” to his book.

IN THE LINE OF FIRE WAS PUBLISHED IN LAST QUARTER OF 2006, EVEN THEN DR. AAFIA SIDDIQUI WAS MISSING. WAS SHE ONE OF THOSE 389, QUOTED IN HIS BOOK?

That said, the irony is, of the 389 people admittedly handed over to USA, most of them incrcerated in Gitmo, have yet to be brought to trial. A large number are of Nationalities other than Pakistan. Some have been released and sent back to Pakistan, including, Abdullah Mehsud, the kin of Baitullah Mehsud.

The case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is even worse. Look at the assertion that she was apprehended in 2003 with her three kids (although officially denied by the then Spokesman of Ministry of Interior). That said, there is no caveat to the fact that she remained missing since then and surprizingly she winds up in the United States, in July 08.

It cannot be denied,with the exception of moot hue and cry here, no Legal Action was brought before Courts, here or abroad, untill very recently. No Writ of Habeas Corpus or any other legal remedy.

It is also a fact that her divorced spouse, is the father of their children and hence natural guardian of the minors. There is nothing in the media, after he filed a suit for Custody, before Dr.Aafia went missing, that he sought the recovery and custody of his minor kids.

Dear Sir, I came upon volumes of material on the net of foreign origin relating to Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, the Article of Deborah Scroggins in March 2005, is but just one of many.

The vibrant and highly motivated Lawyers Movement, Civil Society, NGOs and Media and not the least the Politicians, very aggressively and vociferously took up the cause of Iftikhar Chaudhry (The CJP?) since 9th March 2007.

Some one should also take up her case, not about her guilt or innocence, but definitely for getting her a fair trial.

The questions, those need to be posed are:

1. Where was She, since she went missing in 2003?

2. Where were and are her minor kids?

3. If they were in custody anywhere on the planet earth, why were they incarcerated?

4. Why they were not handed over to Dr.Aafia’s Family or her ex-Groom or his family?

5. Dr. Aafia should be allowed to make her statement before Court of Law in USA, where she is being prosecuted. Her statement should be of her free will and without any fetters or constrain.

6. The questions of her guilt or innocence is matter, that her trial and fair trial will tell in time to come.

6. For now, people of Pakistan, USA and World, must know her version from her. For this she should be facilitated by the Government and Civil Society here and so also in USA.

7. The most urgent question is of the minor chilren. It is universally accepted judicial norm that the Welfare and Well being of the kids comes first. The sooner the where abouts of all three are made known, their rehabilitation could be ensured. They should be given in the care of their Father, Paternal and Maternal Grand Parents.

The volumes of allegations against her in the World media, legally puts THE ONUS ON her prosecutors to establish all or any of the allegations /insinuations in a Court of Law. Untill that’s done, she is innocent in the eyes of law and in her case, the World.

All human hearts, ought to go out for her and prticularly her kids for ensuring above for now.

The ordeal of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, brings me to quote, yet another passage from Former President’s Book:

Musharraf’s dismissal was announced on TV. But he claims that he was still officially and legally the army chief.

To justify his claim he refers to the Supreme court judgment in his book in his case:

“General Pervez Musharraf, Chief of the Army Staff and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, is a holder of [a] constitutional post. His purported arbitrary removal in violation of the principle of Audi alter am partem was ab initio void and of no legal effect.” (p. 127).

Audi alteram partem, means “NO ONE SHALL BE CONDEMED UNHEARD”

THE QUESTION IN DR. AAFIA SIDDIQUI’S CASE IS ALSO THE SAME, SHE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONDEMED UNHEARD FOR THE LAST MANY YEARS NOR NOW.

That said, here is an Article/Story on Dr. Aafi Siddiqui in BOSTON MAGAZINE OCTOBER 2004:
Who’s Afraid of Aafia Siddiqui?
She went to MIT and Brandeis, married a Brigham and Women’s physician, made her home in Boston, cared for her children, and raised money for charities. Aafia Siddiqui was a normal woman living a normal American life. Until the FBI called her a terror
By Katherine Ozment
The men were ready. They knew the woman who would be joining them for the week was a high-profile Al Qaeda operative. They’d been told she should be treated with the utmost respect. She would arrive in Liberia’s bustling capital, Monrovia, on a plane from Quetta, Pakistan. She was to be driven to the safe house, the Hotel Boulevard, where other Al Qaeda figures had stayed, and taken good care of until the deal was done.

The trip from the airport was a hot hour long, and the woman spoke in English to the driver on the way. The driver, who would later become the chief informant in a United Nations-led investigation, described her as a quiet Islamic woman who wore a traditional headscarf and kept mostly to herself. She spent the week holed up in her room, making trips into town for small errands.

About a week after her arrival, the woman left Monrovia as quietly as she had entered, but now she had what she had come for: a large parcel containing gems from Africa’s illegal diamond trade. They would be used as a convenient, hard-to-trace way of funding Al Qaeda’s global terror operations. It was mid-June 2001, three months before September 11.

The men never saw the woman again in person. But earlier this year, one of them says, he saw two photographs of her. At a news conference in May, Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller III announced that the FBI was looking for seven people with suspected ties to Al Qaeda. MIT graduate and former Boston resident Aafia Siddiqui was the only woman on the list. After the photos of her appeared on television, the informant picked up the phone and dialed investigators at the Special Court for Sierra Leone, which is examining Africa’s illegal diamond trade. The informant was convinced that the woman in the photographs was the woman who had come to Liberia.

Now imagine this: The woman in the photographs, Aafia Siddiqui, the same week, mid-June, 2001. She is a 29-year-old mother of two, consumed, like other Boston moms who volunteer or work outside the home, with the minutiae of everyday life. A deeply religious woman, she picks up Korans from a local mosque and distributes them to inmates in area prisons. She hosts play groups in her apartment on the 20th floor of the Back Bay Manor in Roxbury. She takes her sister Fowzia’s child into her care while Fowzia finishes a fellowship in neurology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. She does the grocery shopping and prepares meals for her children and husband, an anesthesiologist at Brigham and Women’s.

This is what Aafia Siddiqui’s family says she was really doing during the summer of 2001. Not brokering diamond deals for Al Qaeda with murderous brutes from the killing fields of Africa, but hosting play groups in her apartment. “Aafia Siddiqui was here in June 2001,” says the family’s attorney, Elaine Whitfield Sharp. “And I can prove it.”

Sharp is best known as one of the lawyers who defended Louise Woodward, the English nanny found guilty of shaking infant Matthew Eappen to death in 1997. If she can prove Siddiqui wasn’t in Liberia that week, she’ll damage one of the most puzzling cases of alleged terrorism to emerge from the ashes of 9/11. The claim that Siddiqui was involved in diamond trading is another in a series of sometimes surprising, sometimes vague accusations by government officials. In Siddiqui’s case, the allegations have been further clouded by the often inaccurate, even hyperbolic descriptions of her by the media.

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/whos_afraid_of_aafia_siddiqui/

Sir due to variant emotional and traditional responses of the said event with the ever own element of feel and perception, no real factual or flimsy report could breach the topic, although it’s too early even still to tag the event with conclusive opinion, thus straining and abiding me to say as my opinion on the very important issue of the era as part of registration.

Amicus this is my pleasure to have an opinion on the table of discussion in front of person whose qualification in terms of advocacy and interpretation has always been the subject of my regard in the contest of digging of facts and figure ,as the same have also been the subject of my family being laden with professional lawyers.

Sir ,though I could not make or find an evaluated perception of your thought on the issue as interpretation in terms of framing legality or illegality as arrest, habeas , and extra judicial detention but still hope that you will reward us with the expertise of skill as interpreter of the law and queries on the subject issue .

Sir after going through the detailed story of the victim and its presented facts ,if at all are true, though to my opinion what has been said as article has weightage and prove logical affiliation of the subject victim with the terrorist organization ,as and what has been suspected as reservation by the American and Pakistani forces.

Sir you being lawyer must be under the familiarity of basic theme of law, as its incapacity to virtually believe but with the evidence and presented facts as destined by law.

Though its bit difficult to hang discussion over every ifs and buts but still there are few exceptional events that clearly reflects the concept of attachment in terms of organizational affiliation ,thereby isolating the suspect as potential and habitual follower .

Amicus though in the article there are few inquisitive affairs which can only be debated if said information is available as float yet keeping the restricted availability of evidences as only information , a conclusive effort as opinion can be made .

It seems clear from the evidences being presented by the author that subject siddiqui family have similar affairs since beginning and era of general zia ul haq as been cited that the two family have probably close relation in terms of ,what ever it may be and the family was rewarded even during the era ,mentioned responsibility.

It is also evident from the ground presentation that the lady has many connections with the suspects by virtue of its affiliation incognito with platform organization MIT /MSA.
Amicus, few more attachment as and per the presented course of syllabi by the author, as presented research based article ,though it’s a unilateral version of book ,but still I have opinion that there is no way out where the lady can get rid of in terms of escape as pious.

In my opinion and as far interpretation, of available data of facts and figures, as being floated in the article, facts do engage her as a mata hari of alqaida and grand reasons as evidences would be required by her so to prove her innocence.

It is also true to the extent that being state of the art technology and advancement in terms of sophisticated tech and modern equipment based methodology; America has little error value as wrong conviction.

Amicus, it seems very illogical to target a lady settled or fled thousands of kilometer away especially when she is not at all a nuclear bomb.

In my opinion there has to be some logical reason for the blame and confiscation in that regard and in this particular scenario, I have no option but to believe it as legalize arrest.

You see why one should act to compromise the integrity and sovereignty of a nation.

No body can be granted relief or clemency for challenging the writ, unrest or sabotage life, land or living.

Which verse as book of the god has legalized war as aggression, and slogan as covert occupation?

What’s the point of such emotional instability and ruthless attitude to dismantle and deranged activity, except fanaticism, wrong perception, incorrect interpretation and deviation?

Amicus though Pandora box is open now for the debate and controversies but still I hope that if such acts of crime was part and parcel of exclusive bookie, event is punishable by all means.

However, minors under no means can be the part of contemplation, though again they are in envisage as American citizen, and it’s america’s responsibility and not our by any means. Regards