ISLAMABAD - Taking suo moto notice over a plea, form a Canadian citizen of Pakistani origin that security of all the Pakistanis was threatened due to the memo controversy, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry on Saturday issued notices to President, PM, ISI DG, Husain Haqqani, the Attorney General and others. The CJP in his order said that this application should be treated as petition under Article 184(3) of the constitution, as prima facie threat to the security of Pakistan/citizens had been alleged in it. This case will also be taken up on December 19 along with the main petitions. Article 184 is about 'Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court and Clause 3 of this Article reads: Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 199, the Supreme Court shall, if it considers that a question of public importance with reference to the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights conferred by Chapter I of Part II is involved have the power to make an order of the nature mentioned in the said Article. The applicant, Shafqatullah Sohail on November 19 had send a letter to the CJP for finding out the truth about the memo, stating that the affair was directly related to the security of Pakistan and armed forces of Pakistan, therefore, it was a matter of national security and national interest. Our national security is at stake now and politicians are just making fun of each other by forming so-called committees for inquiry; any committee will delay the outcomes and in fact the justice, the applicant further said. He said that if the contents of letter were true, each and every Pakistani was at security threat due to present government, as it would mean that this government was not safeguarding the interests of its own people and departments but of other nations and enemies of Pakistan. My family members are in the Army and residing in Pakistan, therefore, I am feeling insecure from this government because they (government) could have invited their (his relatives) enemies to kill them, the applicant added. He requested the court to take suo moto action on this matter to find the facts and give a clear judgment after hearing all the parties. On the other hand, a statement from another character of the Memorandum scandal, former US national security adviser General (r) James Logan Jones, was filed in the Supreme Court on Saturday. Gen Jones had delivered the memo given to him by Mansoor Ijaz to the then-chief of US military Admiral Michael Mullen. Advocate on Record (AOR) Chaudhry Akhtar Ali submitted the statement to the court in the form of an affidavit. Former ambassador to the US Husain Haqqanis counsel, Asma Jehangir had requested Jones to file the affidavit in the case, according to the three-page document submitted to the court. In the affidavit, Jones says he believed the memo was not credible and that Haqqani had nothing to do with it. Agencies add: Barrister Zafarullah submitted his rejoinder to the statements filed by the ISI DG Gen Pasha and Mansoor Ijaz in the Supreme Court. Zafarullah, who had filed a petition in the SC for forming a commission for investigation over memogate scandal, stated in his reply that Mansoor Ijaz was working under American agenda and he has been US security adviser as well. His answer regarding the memogate is unacceptable, he prayed. He further said that instead of calling Ijaz or Gen Pasha to the court, evidences should be presented. Another petitioner Tariq Asad advocate also submitted his reply on replies of the respondents, objecting to replies filed by DG ISI and Army Chief General Kayani. The petitioner said that they submitted their replies in the court without reading. He said that DG ISI and army chief should again submit their detailed replies according to points raised by the court over the memogate. He said that Attorney General had also submitted his reply in a hurry which was unsatisfactory. Meanwhile, main character of memo scandal, Mansoor Ijaz, has rejected Gen James Jones sworn affidavit submitted in the Supreme Court in which the former advisor had claimed he had conversation with Ijaz on telephone a few days prior to May 9. He said in a statement issued to media on Saturday that he had his first contact with Jones on May 9 and not before that date, and it could be proved from his two cell phone bill records that he did not made any contact with James Jones prior to May 9. Ijaz said that six minutes after contacting Husain Haqqani in London on phone, he made contact with James Jones on his residential phone number, adding that after that James contacted him via his new cell phone. The information has been produced in the Supreme Court, he said and added that he would present complete telephone record to the SC investigation officials at an appropriate time. He said Jones statement was correct inasmuch that he never used the name of Haqqani during their conversation, adding that he also never used name of Jones during conversation with Haqqani. But Husain Haqqani had knowledge about contacts with many persons on memo. Ijaz maintained his assertion that Haqqani had dictated the memo to him. He categorically rejected Jones claim that Haqqani had no knowledge of the memo, remarking that Jones has a poor memory, a suggestion that he was hiding the truth.