Apart from the devastating volume of corruption, during their five years rule the PPP government committed all sorts of treacheries to conceal their crimes. The latest mischief has come to light, which relates to the re-opening of probe regarding the Bhutto family’s accounts in the Swiss banks. President Asif Ali Zardari, and his late wife Benazir Bhutto are believed to have siphoned off $ 12 million of the state cash into Swiss banks, during Benazir Bhutto’s regime in the 1990s.It may be recalled that in an effort to recover Pakistan’s looted wealth the governments, other than PPP, which came to power approached the Swiss authorities to open a probe in the case, but surprisingly the ruling clique in 2008 asked them not to do so. The public pressure on the issue being overwhelming the Chief Justice of Pakistan took notice of the case and directed the government in power to write a letter to the Swiss authorities to reopen the probe. The PPP’s top elite, including President Zardari, being involved in the huge misappropriation the government was reluctant to take the step. Since the Supreme Court’s orders had to be complied with, in November 2012 the rulers were compelled to renew the request for Swiss legal assistance in the matter. After the initiation of this request there was a vague hope of recovering the looted wealth, but all hope was dashed by the latest Swiss verdict. The Swiss authorities have expressed their inability to re-open the case for two major reasons, one being a roguish letter written to them by the Zardari government, after the initiation of the first request. The reasons are that the alleged offences took place more than 15 years ago meaning that the statute of limitations had expired. Just after a month of filing the renewed request, the Pakistan government sent them a letter stating that ‘the call for a revived probe was linked to domestic politics and that there was no need to heed it’.This letter was initiated secretly; the act is no less than a treachery and treason, which needs to be notice by the Supreme Court. I am sure the office copy of this letter will not be available in the government record. It will have to be obtained to ascertain who initiated this letter and on whose behest, so that they can be dealt with for defying the object of the Supreme Court’s directive on the subject.RAFI NASIM, Lahore, June 23.