0
KARACHI, July 24: A specially-constituted inquiry committee tasked to probe into three high-profile terrorist incidents has failed to hold even a single meeting following the transfer of Dr Mohammed Shoaib Suddle from his former position as provincial police officer to current his assignment as chief of the intelligence bureau, Dawn has learnt.
As the provincial police officer, Dr Suddle formed a committee on June 23 to investigate the violence witnessed in Karachi on May 12 and Oct 18 last year, and on April 9 this year. The team is comprised of the capital city police chief as the committee chairman, with the Additional IGP Special Branch, DIG, CID and DIG Investigations as members.
The current police chief of the province was city police chief at the time of the constitution of the committee.
The inquiry committee was tasked with fixing responsibility of criminal negligence and collusion during the discharge of duties by the police officials involved. Moreover, it was also meant to focus on tracing the real perpetrators and offenders behind the violence, during which around 50 people were killed on the streets of the city on May 12, 2007, over 150 people died in the suicide bombings at Karsaz on October 18 last year, while six persons – including two women – were burnt alive at a building close to the City Courts on April 9 this year.
According to the terms of reference drawn out for the May 12 incidents, the committee was tasked with probing “as to why the police placed containers on all roads leading to the airport on 11/12th May, 2007.”
The range of inquiries were to include ascertaining whether there was any truth to the assertion that the police allowed certain political activists to control the road blocks on May 11 and 12, and to carefully review why the police failed in both preventing violence on May 12 and tracing or arresting the persons involved in the incidents. Furthermore, the committee was meant to find out whether any disciplinary action was initiated against any police officer on account of negligence on May 12.
‘Fix responsibility and find perpetrators’
In terms of the attack on the late Benazir Bhutto’s homecoming procession on Oct 18, the inquiry committee was tasked with finding out whether the Sindh police had shared intelligence concerning the threat to personnel of the Pakistan Peoples’ Party.
The team was asked to probe the adequacy of the security arrangements made by the Sindh police in consultation with the organisers of the PPP rally, and to inquire why the inner cordon around Ms Bhutto’s truck failed to prevent the attack on her life. The terms of reference extended to investigating why unauthorised vehicles were allowed to park along the route of the rally, and why the crime scene at Karsaz was not secured professionally in the aftermath of the twin suicide bombings.
The committee set up by Dr Suddle was directed to find out whether the Special Branch of the police issued any advance information or internal report on the potential threat to law and order posed by the lawyers’ agitation on April 9.
The range of investigation included looking into the measures taken by the CCPO Karachi, DIG South and SSP Saddar when a scuffle erupted between rival lawyers’ associations at 2.20pm on April 9, and investigating why the police were unable to prevent the spread of the violence to other parts of the city during which 11 people were killed, 23 were injured and a number of vehicles, properties and offices were torched.
The committee was meant to review the efforts made by the police to apprehend and arrest the perpetrators behind the violence on April 9, find out how many – if any – persons were arrested and weapons/explosives/chemical recovered, and judge whether the police effort in this regard was serious or half-hearted.
The high-profile committee was directed to review the security orders issued by the Sindh police on May 12, Oct 18 and April 9 respectively, with the express purpose of finding out whether any departures from the standard operating procedures had occurred. It was further asked to apportion responsibility in all three incidents and suggest effective measures to avoid the reoccurrence of such events in the future.
Sources informed Dawn, however, that following the transfer of Dr Suddle from the province, there is little chance of the committee meeting unless serious political will is levied on inquiring into the events of these three days. Despite the gravity and urgency of the matter, observed a source, “in the given circumstances, most police officials may shy away from the job of focussing on the perpetrators mentioned in the order.”
