Pakistani doctor jailed for Treason - helping a foreign intelligence agency

[Secur]

Do you have comprehension problem. You are an ally on WOT which means killing OBL. You can not breach your contract.

Treason ? For giving blood sample of an unknown person back (CIA can not compromise information that they need DNA of OBL or his rabbits breeding illegally in Pakistan) to an organization he is working for ?

Being an ally once again ( not that I expect you to understand ) doesn't mean that you can pass information to a foreign spy agency ... We do not have an agreement allowing for people to treason ... All intelligence cooperation is on the official level ...
He should have informed " ISI " who would have then chosen to share it with US or not ...

Yes treason , he knew what he was doing ... Hoping for a Green Card and $ ...

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

But I am confused. Many Pakistans believe that Osama bin Laden died in 2002 then why are they trying this doctor?

It does not matter when OBL died, the fact is that the US has officially accepted that Afridi collaborated with a foreign intelligence agency (CIA) in a covert operation inside Pakistan - the nature of what he did does not matter, so long as it can be shown that Afridi 'knowingly collaborated with a foreign intelligence agency without Pakistani authorization'.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Because you say so, I suppose!

Nope, because UNSCR 1373 does not contain any language even remotely implying what you claim. If it does, please quote it, as you have been asked to do in the past but are incapable of since the language does not exist.

The State could praise him for creatively constructing the law and adopting it to the circumstances rather than "looking the other way". According to the ex-GRU spy "Victor Suvorov" this was the argument Soviet spymasters used in the 1950s to justify their illegal (but effective) collaboration independent of Moscow in WWII to work against the Nazis. Rather than the death penalty for treason, they all got medals.

States cannot set precedence's for 'creative interpretations of the law' (the political parties and current Supreme Court have strongly argued against such 'creative interpretations' through their rejection of the 'doctrine of necessity' used to justify various military coups), because then, as you yourself have show with your 'creative distortions and concoctions from UNSCR 1373', individuals can come up with all manner of 'creative interpretations', and the matter becomes a subjective one rather than an objective legal one.

Because you say so, I suppose!

Nope, because UNSCR 1373 does not contain any language even remotely implying what you claim. If it does, please quote it, as you have been asked to do in the past but are incapable of since the language does not exist.

 

[newdelhinsa]

Killing OBL has nothing to do with implementing the laws of Pakistan that do not distinguish between the nature of any covert collaboration (knowingly) by a Citizen of Pakistan with a foreign intelligence agency.

There is no 'breach of contract' here. Pakistan assisted in the hunt for OBL by arresting hundreds of AQ leaders and members (especially KSM) and providing intelligence (such as the phone number of the courier) which allowed the US to track down OBL.

The specifics of the cooperation Afridi extended do not have any bearing on his sentence - so long as he knowingly collaborated with a foreign intelligence agency without Pakistani authorization, he committed a crime, treason.

Aryan does not have a comprehension problem, you and the others who are unable to make the above distinctions do.

Then he has just voluntarily assisted your own establishment by shunting the information directly to their ally. Not a case of treason.

 

[Secur]

Blah blah blah...



Your establishment is full of hypocrites who themselves can apprehend Pakistani nationals to CIA without any charge. Your commando President can come on national TV to tell a nation that they are now partners on WOT.

Reply me why a Pakistani national who has fundamental right of freedom can not be trailed in SC of Pakistan. If you have answer to it then come back.

Yeah , what legal grounds were you harping about ? Better to shut the **** up rather than mock yourself ...

Yes it is , do not tell me your's are all angels but they have done better this time hence i said " they are doing good " Supply routes are closed , Zardari said a straight " NO " to US demands in Chicago ... Are you confusing AQ or Taliban terrorist for common Pakistani nationals now ? Yes , what else should he tell the public , genius ?

Actually , you do not have a ******* idea of the international law and diplomacy and ridiculing yourself on every single post here ... Possibly , I should declare you the common Indian in denial mode with no idea of the realities on ground now , huh ?

Reply me " Why are you so interested in talking about things you know nothing about ? " ... He would be tried in HC and then SC if he appeals ... Supreme Court isn't the one dealing with the case first ... Come back when you understand the meaning of treason and have a fair understanding of " law "

Then he has just voluntarily assisted your own establishment by shunting the information directly to their ally. Not a case of treason.

Why , why not my own establishment ? Should he had conveyed the information directly to ISI , he would have been revered as a hero and given millions just like the ones who were in assisting in capture of high value Taliban and AQ terrorist ...

Go look up the meaning of " treason "

Just curious , what would you call it if an Indian sees and identifies a wanted Chechen separatist and then instead of giving the information to RAW , provides it to FSB who then hunt him down ?

 

[iPhone]

The case in court wasn't about him trying to catch OBL but rather him collaberating with a foreign agency without being authorized by the state to do so. Treason. Simple.

Now whatever spin these indian morons put is irrelevant. With traitors, always remember one thing, nip it in the bud right away. Or they'll grow like locust.

 

[Solomon2]

Let us put the shoe on the other foot. What would happen to a US citizen who, under some circumstances, collaborated with, say Russian intelligence, in killing a dissident -

Uh-uh, this hypothetical doesn't parallel the reality. As CIA director Leon Panetta put it tonight on television, Dr. A. was never asked to "spy" for the U.S. but did provide information about a recognized international terrorist.

Nope, because UNSCR 1373 does not contain any language even remotely implying -

Sure. It's a Chapter VII resolution, so it's binding under international law.

States cannot set precedence's for 'creative interpretations of the law'

I just gave one example.

(the political parties and current Supreme Court have strongly argued against such 'creative interpretations' through their rejection of the 'doctrine of necessity' used to justify various military coups)

Yes, Pakistan has abused this approach in the past, I can see how that might make you wary of it now - except that the PM just got 33 seconds instead of 33 years of punishment. Sounds pretty creative to everyone, not just me.

 

[Secur]

Uh-uh, this hypothetical doesn't parallel the reality. As CIA director Leon Panetta put it tonight on television, Dr. A. was never asked to "spy" for the U.S. but did provide information about a recognized international terrorist.

Sure. It's a Chapter VII resolution, so it's binding under international law.

Sure it doesn't , just because it doesn't suit us nor you can refute it

Once again , going round and round in circles , who's asking if its binding or not ? You were asked to quote that part allowing " treason " Where is it ? Cant you find it just like your classified -not known reports about Pakistan ?

Desperate people like you when they have no answers , try to bring everything irrelevant from PM's punishment to establishment past actions

 

[Respect4Respect01]

he got lucky that he is only jailed, we all wish death sentence for this traitor.

 

[TechMan]

I would love to see him hanged but 30 years in prison is also ok. In fact I would say add 23 hours (per day) of solitary confinement to make him suffer more. Don't want him to come out alive. I hope Pakistan will be able to carry out this sentence and not buckle under pressure from USA because they have made their intentions very clear from day one in which case hanging him would be the best option.

 

[Bang Galore]

Bang Galore - Come come lets not speculate of what may or may not be his motive and his mindset. He had knowledge and information that was sensitive to the security of his nation and he decided not to go to his first port of call. He as any citizen OF any nation should have respected his nations hierarchy.
Have a think if someone from India behaved against his nations interests and perhaps interjected with a third party - would your sympathy be of the same nature?
You must understand the eventual outcome of his actions is a seperate matter and one cant argue with the outcome - he failed his duty as a Pakistani national hence must face the result of the Pakistani judiciary system.
When in the past the same has happened by American citizens where acts of treason have been committed life sentances have been administered. Why do you wish their to be a different ruling for this chap?

Not my argument at all. Unlike others, I come not praising this good doctor or his actions though the fact that he did, in whatever capacity help get rid of a notorious scumbag is a big plus. Your arguments about treason may be a tad harsh but still within the boundaries of reason. My point was not on the legal technicalities but on whether this action contributes to a continuing deterioration of Pakistan's image.I believe it does & on that point find this terribly foolish. Will turn out to be a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face in my view. What you do with the doctor is kind of irrelevant.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Uh-uh, this hypothetical doesn't parallel the reality. As CIA director Leon Panetta put it tonight on television, Dr. A. was never asked to "spy" for the U.S. but did provide information about a recognized international terrorist.

That is called 'unauthorized collaboration with a foreign intelligence agency', the purpose could have been espionage or anything else.

Sure. It's a Chapter VII resolution, so it's binding under international law.

Again, your inability to quote any relevant text from the resolution speaks volumes about the fact that your 'interpretation of UNSCR 1373 is nothing but a concoction out of thin air'.

Whether the resolution is binding or not does not change the fact that the resolution does not imply, let alone state, anything along the lines of what you have argued in the case of Afridi's sentencing or unilateral US military strikes in Pakistan.

I just gave one example.

A highly flawed one - here is one from the US - Bradley Manning could have been argued to have been 'acting for the greater good' by releasing confidential information to the public - whether or not he acted for the 'greater good' is subjective, and not the basis of his trial, which is solely based on the legality of his actions, as is the case with Afridi.

Whether or not Afridi's actions were for the 'greater good' is irrelevant when it comes to the legality of his actions - unauthorized collaboration with a foreign intelligence agency is a serious crime. The goal of this foreign intelligence agency might have been benign, or anti-Pakistan - Afridi was in no position to determine how his actions would affect Pakistan ultimately, and yet he chose to continue with that particular course of action, and that choice of violating the law and potentially putting Pakistan's national security at risk must be punished and a precedent set to prevent others from doing the same and hiding behind similar excuses.

Yes, Pakistan has abused this approach in the past, I can see how that might make you wary of it now - except that the PM just got 33 seconds instead of 33 years of punishment. Sounds pretty creative to everyone, not just me.

Nothing creative about the sentencing - the sentencing was within the law. Afridi's sentence is also within the law - his exoneration would not be within the law, given that the US has officially admitted to his complicity in an illegal intelligence and military operation inside Pakistan.

Then he has just voluntarily assisted your own establishment by shunting the information directly to their ally. Not a case of treason.

Pakistani law does not authorize, and the relevant Pakistani institutions have not authorized, an unauthorized exchange of information, collaboration and assistance for foreign intelligence agencies in Pakistan.

So he has violated Pakistani law.

 

[Bang Galore]

US senators warn Pakistan on aid over bin Laden

WASHINGTON — Key US senators Wednesday demanded that Pakistan pardon a surgeon handed 33 years in prison for helping in the hunt for Osama bin Laden, warning that the decision could put US assistance at risk.

A tribal court in Khyber, a lawless district and extremist hotbed, sentenced surgeon Shakeel Afridi for treason after he agreed to collect DNA for US intelligence to verify the presence of the most-wanted Al-Qaeda leader.

Carl Levin and John McCain, the top senators from the two major US parties on the Senate Armed Services Committee, in a joint statement called Afridi's sentence "shocking and outrageous."

"What Dr. Afridi did is the furthest thing from treason. It was a courageous, heroic and patriotic act which helped to locate the most wanted terrorist in the world -- a mass murderer who had the blood of many innocent Pakistanis on his hands," the two senators said.

McCain and Levin urged Pakistan to pardon and free Afridi "immediately."

"Dr. Afridi's continuing imprisonment and treatment as a criminal will only do further harm to US-Pakistani relations, including diminishing Congress's willingness to provide financial assistance to Pakistan," they said.

The United States has provided Pakistan with more than $18 billion since it joined the war in Afghanistan following the September 11, 2001 attacks, but US officials have persistently worried that some elements of the Pakistani establishment have maintained support for extremists.

US lawmakers rejected calls to cut off aid but imposed tougher conditions after US forces in May last year killed bin Laden, who had been living a stone's throw away from Pakistan's elite military academy in Abbottabad.

Pakistan shut down supply routes -- its main assistance to US-led forces in Afghanistan -- after a border air raid in November killed 26 Pakistani troops. President Barack Obama has voiced regret, calling the deaths an accident, but stopped short of meeting demands for an apology.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari flew to Chicago for this week's NATO summit on Afghanistan amid signs of a deal on the supply routes. But no agreement materialized and Zardari left Chicago after only a brief meeting with Obama.

AFP: US senators warn Pakistan on aid over bin Laden

 

[Sashan]

US to press for release of Pakistani doctor who helped find Bin Laden

State department says there is 'no basis' for Shakil Afridi's 33-year sentence for his part in fake CIA vaccine drive


The US has said it will press for the release of a Pakistani doctor who has been jailed for 33 years for running a fake CIA vaccination programme as part of the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

The US state department said there is "no basis" for the arrest and detention of Dr Shakil Afridi, the former surgeon-general of Khyber, who was convicted of treason over the scheme to identify Bin Laden through DNA.

But even as senior American politicians denounced the sentence as "outrageous", the Obama administration shied away from strong comment on the trial itself as officials said that the legal process is not at an end. Officials are hoping that the sentence can be shortened or overturned on appeal.

"We continue to see no basis for these charges, for him being held, for any of it," said the state department spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland. "We will continue to make representations."

Privately, Obama administration officials are angered by Afridi's arrest and trial which is further evidence of the sharp deterioration in relations with Pakistan. They say that the doctor did not act against Pakistan but against al-Qaida.

Two US senators, John McCain and Carl Levin, denounced Afridi's conviction and demanded his immediate release.

"Afridi's actions were completely consistent with the multiple, legally-binding resolutions passed over many years by the United Nations Security Council, which required member states to assist in bringing Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida network to justice," the two senior Senators on the armed services committee said in a joint statement.

"Afridi set an example that we wish others in Pakistan had followed long ago. He should be praised and rewarded for his actions, not punished and slandered.

"At a time when the US and Pakistan need more than ever to work constructively together, Afridi's continuing imprisonment and treatment as a criminal will only do further harm to US-Pakistani relations, including diminishing Congress's willingness to provide financial assistance to Pakistan."

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, chairman of a foreign affairs subcommittee, demanded the Obama administration take punitive action against Pakistan.

"This is decisive proof Pakistan sees itself as being at war with us," he said.

Afridi's sentence will further alarm western critics of Pakistan who say the country has put far more effort into trying to understand how US spies and special forces were able to plan and launch the Bin Laden raid than into how the al-Qaida leader was able to remain for so long in the Pakistani army garrison town of Abbottabad.

The sentence was announced just days after Barack Obama snubbed the Pakistani president, Asif Ali Zardari, by refusing to hold a formal meeting with him at the Nato conference in Chicago.

In January, Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, said he was "very concerned" about the arrest of Afridi after Pakistan's intelligence service discovered he had set up a fake hepatitis B vaccination scheme with his nurses going from house to house in Abbottabad in the weeks before the raid on Bin Laden's hideout in May last year.

"For them to take this kind of action against somebody who was helping to go after terrorism, I just think it is a real mistake on their part," Panetta said in January.

There had been hopes that Afridi would eventually be quietly released after the controversy surrounding the Bin Laden raid had subsided.

US intelligence officials say the clandestine operation by Afridi did not succeed in determining whether Bin Laden was in the house and the raid went ahead without any certainty that the Navy Seal team would find its target.

However, Pakistani security officials recently told the Guardian that although the nurses working for Afridi were not allowed inside the house to vaccinate any of the children, they did succeed in getting a mobile phone number for someone in the house.

The Pakistani sources say that phone call allowed the CIA to make a voice match to Bin Laden's private courier, a man known as Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti.

US aid groups have complained that the bogus vaccination operation undermined their efforts "to eradicate polio, provide critical health services, and extend life-saving assistance during times of crisis" in Pakistan. The ruse may have fuelled fears, backed by religious extremists, that polio drops are a western conspiracy to sterilise the population



US to press for release of doctor who helped find Bin Laden | World news | guardian.co.uk

 

[jagjitnatt]

Pakistan's judiciary is fucked up to say the least. Its completely biased. There are 1000s of criminals who committed grave crimes in Pakistan who are roaming free, and delivering speeches openly. And here we have a doctor who simply reported to US of the worlds most wanted terrorist.

No amount of technicalities can hide the fast that the outcome was in the interest of the world, US and Pakistan. Osama was hiding in Pakistan illegally. So technically the doctor didn't even commit treason. It was the US which entered Pakistan's airspace to take OBL out, not the doctor.

With judgement like this, sensible Pakistanis will feel more threatened and restricted in Pakistan, most will want to leave Pakistan(as is evident from the survey last month), and the rest will join insurgencies.

And then ISI will blame India of fueling them.