Original Articles

ISI-backed judiciary’s verdict in favour of 14 rapists – by Ali Sher Mussali

Chief Justice Iftakhar Chaudhry’s party, Supreme League of Pakistan (SLOP) has proved all rapists in Mukhtara’s case as honorable citizens and innocents. After six years, SLOP reached a consensus that suo moto against Punjab’s SLOP was a non-political decision and it was done in haste.

SLOP alleged to be a political wing of ISI,   was founded through a coup wihin a state paid institution which was once known as the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The  ISI, nother self reliant, paid and armed organization did that coup in the name of restoration of judiciary and  to transform that institute as its political wing.  SLOP has support from all corners which  right wing political groups (PTI/Imran Khan, PML N)  and from advocates, journalists, writers and Mullas. Its creator, the  ISI,  named it as the Civil Society of Pakistan and LUBP renamed it as Fake Civil Society (FCS).

ISI has supported SLOP continuously on quid pro quo basis.  ISI successfully got Raymond Davis out from the jaws of the right wing’s  and was ably assisted by  by SLOP. Nowadays,  the Chief of Choudhris (CoC) or Chief of SLOP is asked by the clever think tank in ISA and FCS to play a very wise political game.

CoC has shown his interest in ZAB’s judicial murder case which is due to Jiyalas’ pressure. I was amazed about his remarks on ZAB’s reference. His think tank was not happy to hear those remarks. His think tank comprised of the  FSC and the ISI is anxious to get him out from PPP’s political net which compelled him admire ZAB.  His think tank wishes him not to act like Chief Justice of Supreme Court but as Chief of Choudhris or Chief of SLOP.


SLOP is managing politics to convert Pakistan into a full Militant Islamofascist State.  Today’s verdict in favour of 14 rapist landlords is message for all of us. Their verdict against a low caste marginalised raped woman can create confusion for some of SLOP’s liberal supporters. Aitzaz Ahsan was advocating in favour of raped woman Mukhtaran but he failed to defend  her and get justice from those people from whom he was accepting change in the state as Maan Kay Jaysee state.

I think the civil society including a new political party CFD sponsored by FSC elite will take this issue. I don’t know at what level the FCS will voice against SLOP because FSC including Aitzaz are part of the SLOP’s think tank.

FCS never came out and supported in favour of ZAB’s case reference filled in court of SLOP or so called Supreme Court of Pakistan. It is because this reference is filed by the sitting president of Pakistan and a leader of PPP. For FCS, ZAB wasthe  leader of illiterate and uncivilized civil society of Pakistan. 

FCS has to come on carpeted roads to light candles in favour of Mukhtaran Mai but demos, protests, strikes against their supreme leader and his  full bench of 16 othesr, cannot be accepted. However at this stage SLOP and its think tank ISI and FSC have to play many  new tricks to kill off the elected PPP-lead Government’s political moves such as, 18th amendment, ZAB’s reference, reconciliation with PML (Q), foreign policy, fight against the Taliban etc.

Whatever new political trick SLOP is being designing, PPP’s leadership and their voters have to and certainly will face it. But I think we should continue condemning Supreme Court’s verdict against women victims and we should continue support women like Aasia Bibi and Mukhtaran Mai.

About the author



Click here to post a comment
  • Dunya kee tareekh gawah hay, adl bina jamhoor na hoga!!!! I wonder if Aitzaz Sahab will recite this poem on Capital Talk where he will for sure be called to comment on the case.

  • Already

    – All the terrorists in this country were honorable and innocent citizens

    – All those who committed religious persecution against minorities were true and pious Muslims and honorable citizens

    – Majority of those involved in corruption were honorable citizens and extremely innocent

    And now rapists are also honorable and innocent citizens

  • this is what the court ordered on April 21, 2011:

    In view of the majority decision, all the noted appeals are hereby dismissed. The suo moto action initiated by this Court vide order dated 14.3.2005 in the matter is also discharged. Therefore, all those who were arrested pursuant to the order of this Court dated 28.6.2005 if not required in any other case be released forthwith. Abdul Khaliq, however shall be released after serving his sentence as awarded to him by the learned High Court, the benefit of Section 382 Criminal Procedure Code extended to him
    by that Court is also maintained.

    Understanding the court’s final decision might seem impossible for many people. But reading the judgement does clarify and confirm some facts. A link to the full judgement can be found at the end of this post.

    To start, though, here are some excerpts from the Supreme Court’s judgement:

    From item #29:

    The contradictions of the prosecution case mentioned in the impugned judgment and also highlighted by the learned defence counsel are not so significant as to render the entire prosecution case false. Some of the contradictions between statements of the prosecution witnesses about minute details of the various stages of the episode, from the detention of Abdul Shakoor right up to the commission of rape, spreading over several hours can be attributed to the hectic activities and tension between the two groups, particularly in the complainant’s camp. Even otherwise the contradictions taken into consideration by the High Court were mainly with reference to the statements made by the witnesses to the fact finding enquiry, which were never proved.

    From item #31:

    The Panchayat thus approved and facilitated the commission of zina-bil-jabr.

    From item #33:

    The complainant had charged four accused for gang rape; Abdul Khaliq, his brother, Allah Ditta, Faiz Muhammad and Ghulam Fareed. All the four were convicted by the Trial Court under Section 10(4) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance, 1979 and each of them sentenced to death. For the reasons afore-stated, rape by Abdul Khaliq stands proved beyond shadow of doubt. He was the main figure in the entire episode, playing the lead role from locking up of Abdul Shakoor to dragging the complainant to his house.

    From item #33:

    As regards Fayyaz accused, undisputedly a resident of Rampur, and not a mastoi, the defence case has been that he was mistaken for another Muhammad Fayyaz, resident of Mirwali, a mastoi and cousin of Abdul Khaliq.

    From item #33:

    The complainant was subjected to rape in a room in the house of Abdul Khaliq at around mid night. The prosecution evidence is completely silent about the source of light in the room. The site plan carries a note by the investigating officer that he was informed that it was a moon lit night, thereby tacitly confirming the absence of electric light in the room. The complainant had charged four accused for the rape. The only sentence for gang rape under Section 10(4) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance, 1979 is death. The complainant’s allegation of being gang raped may not be false but in such a situation where one of the accused, Fayyaz, is being given benefit of doubt and acquitted of the charge of rape, and there was no light in the room where the incident took place, it may be unsafe to convict the other two accused of offence under Section 10(4) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance, 1979.

    From item #35:

    The High Court, as observed above, erred in holding that the delay in lodging of F.I.R. is fatal to the prosecution case; that the testimony of a rape victim requires corroboration. The Court had overlooked that there was corroboration of the complainant’s testimony. The Court failed to give due attention and weight to the testimony of the victim of the rape and its findings were considerably influenced by its erroneous view about the role of P.W. Maulvi Abdul Razzaq. The High Court was not entitled to use, and that too extensively, for the purpose of highlighting inconsistencies in the prosecution case, the statements recorded by Mirza Muhammad Abbas (P.W.6), during the facts finding inquiry…

    To download the full 90-page decision, click here.




  • Thanks Usman Ghani Sahib, we are living in pure Islamic state>

    “Fayyaz, is being given benefit of doubt and acquitted of the charge of rape, and there was no light in the room where the incident took place, it may be unsafe to convict the other two accused of offence under Section 10(4) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance, 1979”.

  • This specific topic normally doesn’t curiosity everyone, however you get were able to create this article in a very distinctive way. It’s certainly not tedious along with When i examine the slide without having stopping when. While not related to our blog, value relating to….