ISLAMABAD - Coordinator National Counter Terrorism Authority Khaliq Dad Lak on Wednesday revealed before the top court that transfer orders of DPO Rizwan Gondal from Pakpattan were issued from Chief Minister Punjab Usman Buzdar’s office.

He further revealed that Inspector General of Police Syed Kalim Imam, who is now heading Sindh police, had acted as ‘rubber stamp’ and behaved ‘more loyal than the King’.

“In the wake of these circumstances, it can safely be concluded that the orders of transferring former DPO Pakpattan at an odd time on 27-08-2018 flowed from the CM office and the former IGP only acted as a 'rubber stamp',” the report stated, adding, “There was some pressure to teach the DPO a lesson.”

Lak submitted his report in pursuance of the Supreme Court’s order in a suo moto notice on the controversy following suspension of DPO Pakpattan Rizwan Gondal after his meeting in the CM Buzdar’s office where a private person Ahsan Jamil Gujjar allegedly pressurised the DPO to visit ‘dera’ of first lady’s former husband Khawar Maneka and tender apology over manhandling. 

However, the report mentioned statement of CM Buzdar which adopted his earlier stance in the matter.

CM Punjab Buzdar, who completely dissociated himself, was asked when it was decided in the meeting that the RPO will look into matter, then why inquiry was conducted by Additional IGP. The CM responded that IGP Imam had ordered for the inquiry and that he was not aware as to why Gondal was transferred before finalisation of inquiry. Likewise, when asked whether Gujjar said ‘all will suffer if such happens in future’, the CM responded that he could not recall if some words were spoken. 

Over the report which completely negated earlier report of IGP Imam, wherein all sides were cleared, a 3-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar and comprising Justice Faisal Arab and Justice Ijazul Ahsan took up the matter for hearing.

Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar while appreciating Lak for his efforts to conduct an inquiry and analysing the entire episode directed CM Punjab Usman Buzdar, IGP Kalim Imam and the first lady’s former husband Khawar Maneka to submit their replies on the report within 3 days.

The inquiry report could be damaging for political future of CM Buzdar as the chief justice told Buzdar’s counsel to be prepared on the aspects of Article 62 (1) (f) as well on the next date of hearing. “We have been granting pardon again and again but it cannot be granted again,” the CJ observed, further remarking that CM Buzdar should keenly be conversant of Article 62 (1) (f) in the instant matter.

According to the report, Ahsan Jamil, a friend of Maneka, during cross examination has also partly accepted both statements made during the meeting with a little variation of words. Gujjar, however, reiterated that his intent was to only sensitise and to find a solution.

“In the wake of circumstances, I am of the opinion that these two statements have been uttered by Jamil which are certainly derogatory, insulting and constitute misconduct. Now, whether they constitute criminal intimidation is purely a legal debate. Criminal intimidation is defined in Section 503 of PPC,” Lak in his report stated.

In order to constitute this offence, Lak stated, the statement of Gujjar saying ‘if such things happen next time, all will suffer’ needs to be examined carefully.

“Prima facie, ‘All will suffer' is the threat but interestingly, he has also included himself among the sufferers and seems to be a vague and non-specific threat. The important question is as what are things Jamil was referring to by saying ‘if such things happen next time’,” Lak stated. 

The statement may be interpreted differently in different situations. If he was referring to the earlier incident of intercepting the family on their way to ‘Darbar’, then the threat was more of a warning meant to stop the police interfering in their affairs.

On the other hand, if he was referring to the later event of stoppage of Maneka’s vehicle at Nakabandi, the threat was meant to stop police from performing a legal duty which is certainly liable.

The report further maintained that the DIG HQ also confirms that he first received a telephone order from IGP Imam on August 26 at about 10pm to transfer the DPO Pakpattan. The DIG HQ also confirmed that he received another call from the IGP around 12 midnight to convey to DPO about the transfer.

“This urgency from the IGP also goes in line with the statement of former DPO Pakpattan whereby orders were conveyed by PSO to CM to IGP to remove him by 9am. The corresponding timeframe also matches.”

The RPO also acknowledged that he talked back to the DIG HQ for a request to IGP to wait till finalisation of inquiry but after sometime he received a message to comply with orders.

Lak further stated that PSO to the CM confirmed that he talked to DPO in the morning but the purpose was not to check whether the DPO had relinquished the charge but it was just a courtesy call.

“If we accept his version that it was just a courtesy call and furthermore it was also just a matter of coincidence that call was made at 9am, then it is too far-fetched rather unbelievable. The version of the DPO that PSO called to check seems plausible."

Regarding version of IGP that he had no external pressure, the report said, “if the IGPs’ version is accepted, then in normal course of action, a summary is moved to the CM for approval which happens only in urgent cases or on directions from higher quarters that a post-facto approval is sought”.

“In this case no summary was moved initially. So, if the orders had flowed from the IGP at his accord, then what was urgency to issue transfer orders at midnight and to convey to the officer verbally to immediately report to CPO the following day”, Lak questioned.

“Now coming to the second issue of post-facto approvals, it is interesting to note that most of these post-facto approvals relate to orders which were issued on the directions from the CM and then summary was sent for his confirmation”.