KARACHI, Dec 18: An inquiry tribunal investigating the Oct 18 Karsaz blasts was told on Tuesday that no focal person was appointed or nominated by the Sindh home department for coordination among police, Rangers, Airport Security Force (ASF), intelligence agencies and other departments as part of the arrangements for the homecoming of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.
“Did the home department appoint or nominate any focal person for coordination?” the head of the tribunal, Justice (retd) Dr Ghaus Mohammad, asked the additional secretary (law enforcement) in the home department, Naveed Ahmed Shaikh, during his testimony.
A visibly confused additional secretary, however, replied in the negative, saying that no focal person was appointed by the home department to coordinate the security arrangements among the various departments.
He also said that, to the best of his knowledge, the home department did not receive any compliance report from any relevant agency about the security instructions prepared by his department and sent to other agencies.
State of unpreparedness
It seemed that he was not prepared to face such questions, and, at one point, the tribunal even expressed annoyance over his slow response.
Besides Mr Shaikh, the tribunal also recorded and examined the testimony of DIG (Traffic) Wajid Ali Durrani during Tuesday’s proceedings held at the Anti-Terrorism Courts complex. DIG (Headquarters) Waseem Ahmed did not appear before the tribunal as he was said to be unwell.
The additional secretary deposed before the tribunal that he was conversant with the facts of the case to the extent that he had attended the meetings held in the home department regarding security arrangements for Ms Bhutto on her Oct 18 homecoming.
He produced copies of various letters written by Senator Farooq Naik, Syed Qaim Ali Shah and Rashid Rabbani to different government officials. Besides, there was a letter from the interior ministry, dated October 10, 2007, regarding Ms Bhutto’s security.
He said the first meeting in this regard was held on Oct 12 in the home department and was attended by representatives of the Pakistan People’s Party and senior police, Rangers, intelligence and ASF officials. “I prepared the minutes of that meeting and after approval copies of the minutes were forwarded to all the people concerned, including PPP representative Maj-Gen (retd) Ahsan Ahmed.”
Potential threats
The tribunal asked him whether the PPP representative spoke of any potential threat. The additional secretary replied that PPP representative Maj-Gen Ahsan had expressed apprehension that in spite of having made all possible security arrangements, threats of potential penetration of suicide bombers in the crowd was there. However, he did not elaborate this point during the meeting, he added.
Mr Shaikh informed the tribunal that another meeting was held on the same issue on Oct 16 in the office of the home secretary and attended by the PPP representatives and government officials. He produced the copy of the minutes, the code of conduct and an order regarding the enforcement of Section 144.
He deposed that on Oct 17 the home department also issued security instructions addressed to the Provincial Police Officer (PPO), the DG Rangers and the Capital City Police Officer besides sending its copies to the interior secretary, the Sindh chief secretary and others, including the provincial health secretary.
“Did you get a response from the health secretary?” asked the tribunal. “No, the Sindh government did not inform the home department about the arrangements, if any, made by the health department to meet any emergency,” replied the additional home secretary.
The tribunal asked him whether the home department had nominated any focal person for coordination. Again his reply was in the negative.
Answering a query, Mr Shaikh said the then adviser on home affairs, Waseem Akhtar, was heading the department at that time. “Did he [Mr Akhtar] attend any meeting [held in connection with the security of Ms Bhutto]?” Justice (retd) Dr Ghaus asked the additional secretary, who replied that the adviser did not attend any security meeting.
In response to another question, Mr Shaikh said he could not say whether the then home adviser convened any meeting within the department to discuss security arrangements.
These questions and their subsequent replies forced additional advocate-general Arshad Lodhi to intervene and clarify that the then home adviser did not hold any meeting because the home secretary was the head of the security arrangements.
However, the tribunal continued questioning the additional secretary and asked whether the then chief minister had held any meeting in that connection. Mr Shaikh deposed that it was not in his knowledge whether any meeting regarding security arrangements was convened or held by the then CM.
Referring to the bullet-proof vehicle made by the PPP, the tribunal asked the additional home secretary whether the home department was satisfied with that vehicle. Mr Shaikh replied that he could not say whether the home department was satisfied with the bullet-proof vehicle arranged by the PPP.
Hearing this vague reply, Justice Ghaus pointed out that it was written on serial number 6 of the security instruction document, which was written by Mr Shaikh, that the PPP had arranged a specially-fabricated vehicle which had bullet-proofing and “the level of security provided is not clear”.
In an attempt to defend his earlier version, the additional secretary said that since the home department was not clear about the level of security, it gave further instructions to the bomb disposal squad (BDS) and the special branch to check the vehicle. “Did you get compliance of this or you asked them for a report?” asked the tribunal. Mr Shaikh conceded that the home department did not receive any communication from the BDS or the special branch and to his knowledge the home department did not ask for a compliance report.
“Did you get compliance reports of the security instructions?” the tribunal asked. “As far as I know, no compliance report was received from any relevant agency regarding security instructions,” Mr Shaikh replied.
Surprised with such replies, Justice (retd) Dr Ghaus asked the official to tell the tribunal about his status in the home department. The additional secretary told the tribunal that he was the relevant official regarding law enforcement and all related papers were marked to him by the secretary and the special secretary of the home department.
Mr Shaikh deposed that on the day of the incident, he had been in his office for more than 24 hours and home secretary Brig (retd) Mohtaram was also available all the time in his office. However, both of them did not visit the place of the incident after receiving information about the blasts.
Meanwhile, DIG (Traffic) Wajid Ali Durrani told the tribunal that two meetings were held in connection with the traffic arrangements for the Oct 18 rally in which PPP representatives also participated.
He deposed that on Oct 16 it was decided that heavy containers and barricades would be placed on all major crossings and intersections leading towards the main Sharea Faisal. A traffic plan was issued the same day. He produced the copy of the traffic plan.
However, he said the PPP representatives objected to the placing of containers and in another meeting held on Oct 17 it was decided that only barricades would be placed but they should be removed as soon as the rally started.
The tribunal asked him where he was at the time of the incident. He said he was at his home and got first-hand information through the media. He maintained that he had been in touch with his subordinates and issued instructions both on the telephone and wireless from his residence.
He said he was monitoring the evacuation of Ms Bhutto and he was informed by his subordinate that she had reached Bilawal House safely.
He admitted that after the blasts there was no force in the vicinity of the place of the incident to control traffic. He said he did not visit the site because it was not his job.
DIG Durrani deposed that the department did not receive any complaint from the PPP side regarding traffic arrangement.
Dr Ghaus also directed the liaison office, SSP Niaz Khoso, to ensure the appearance of the witnesses as he wanted to speed up the proceedings.
The tribunal issued notices to DIG (Headquarters) Waseem Ahmed and SP Pir Farid Jan Sarhandi to appear on Dec 26, the next date of hearing.