FORMER spymaster retired Lt-Gen Asad Durrani finds himself in hot water again. In a reply submitted to the Islamabad High Court opposing a petition filed by Gen Durrani against his name being placed on the Exit Control List, the defence ministry has stated that he has been interacting with Indian intelligence agency RAW and was likely to be involved in future publications against the interest of Pakistan.

Military Intelligence had asked the interior ministry to put his name on the ECL after the publication of a book based on his discussions with a former head of RAW and he was accordingly put on the ECL in 2018. The defence ministry in its reply submitted to the IHC opposed his name being taken off the list saying that he was put on the list for “his involvement in anti-state activities”.

The book that landed the former general in trouble may have raised some eyebrows for its central theme — two former heads of ISI and RAW speaking about the Pakistan-India relationship and related topics. However, there is hardly anything in the book that may be categorised as a state secret. There are opinions and analyses of the two former spy chiefs based on their experiences in these highly sensitive positions but it is fairly clear that Gen Durrani has leaked no national secrets.

Subsequently, he also authored a book of fiction that too does not ‘spill any beans’ so to speak. It is therefore surprising that the state has reacted so harshly to the two books and initiated punitive action against the retired general. The document submitted by the defence ministry, and the language it contains, is even more surprising. Accusing a former chief of the ISI for being involved in anti-state activities is unfortunate. More thought should have been given to the matter before documenting it in such a way. It sheds a bad light on everyone. Of course, this is not to say that the state should look the other way if anyone, irrespective of his position, is found involved in activities that are detrimental to the national interest.

In this case however, such a serious accusation should be backed by solid evidence. The books do not appear to contain any such evidence that may prove that the former general was involved in anti-state activities. If the state has any other evidence that substantiates the allegations, then it would be advisable for it to bring forward such proof so that its case is strengthened.

A better way to deal with this grave matter would be to try the former general in an open court. This would fulfil all requirements of transparency and also show that if solid proof is available then everyone, including a senior general, can be held accountable for his actions.

Published in Dawn, January 29th, 2021