ISLAMABAD: DG ISI General Shuja Pasha in his reply to the Supreme Court said he was satisfied that Mansoor Ijaz 'had enough corroborative material to prove his version of the incident', General Pasha states that Ijaz would not have been able to write the article without having evidence about the memo.
The DG ISI further said that the article of Mansoor Ijaz published in Financial Times was part of a usual anti-ISI rhetoric.
Given below is the complete text of the reply of DG ISI Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha submitted to the Supreme Court on Thursday:
Respectfully submitted;
1. Respondent No 7 has not received any petition till now. However, in compliance with the orders of the Honourable Court dated 1.12.2011 reply is submitted herein:
2. Media Wing of ISI brought to my notice the piece published in the Financial Times on the 10th of October. It was written by one Mr Mansoor Ejaz. The writer had, in this article, criticised the ISI's role and suggested some actions against the Organization. This was usual anti ISI rhetoric.
3. But I did find the opening paragraph of this piece quite unusual and damaging. It mentioned that a senior Pakistani official had been attempting to pass on a message to senior US leaders indicating imminence of a military takeover in Pakistan. The whole thing looked intriguing. I concluded that one could write such a piece so blatantly unless he had some evidence to support his assertions. I, therefore, tasked my sources to know about Mr Mansoor Ijaz and find out if he would agree to share the information about the purported Memorandum.
4. It was confirmed to me by my sources that Mr Mansoor ijaz was ready to share the information but only with the Director General and also not in Pakistan. He insisted that the meeting shall be without any aides on both sides. Accordingly, a meeting was thus planned and took place in London on 22nd of October 2011.
5. Mr Mansoor Ijaz briefed me that our Ambassador in Washington had gotten in touch with him and remained in communication about the contents and delivery of the Memo to the relevant US authorities. He also showed me the proof of a large number of messages sent through BlackBerry which had been exchanged between our Ambassador in Washington and him regarding the document, which later came to be known as the Memorandum. He explained to me in fair amount of details about the circumstances leading to the drafting of Memo and why it was delivered through him. I told him, that I could not believe him unless I saw his BlackBerry and Computer myself to form an opinion that the messages were really exchanged between the two individuals. Having seen these means of communication used, I was satisfied that he had enough corroborative material to prove his version of the incident. He insisted that he will present the details of the evidence himself before a commission or court of law, if asked to do so.
6. I left London the next evening and reported my findings verbally to the Chief of Army Staff on 24th October 2011.
7. I met the Honourable President of Pakistan on 18th of November 2011 when this matter also came under discussion and I briefed him on what, according to my assessment, the facts were. I also suggested to him the issue pertained to National Security and should not be taken lightly. I suggested to the President that it will be in the fitness of things to ask our Ambassador in Washington to verify or contradict the matter.
8. The Respondent has the honour to lead ISI, an organization that stands in forefront, particularly during the peace time, to safeguard the security of the Country as well as the honour and respect of its people. Men and women under command of the Respondent continue to risk their lives and those of their children to positively contribute to the overall security calculus of the Country. All our efforts are geared towards that end.
9. The Respondent, in his humble personal capacity, maintains that access to unadulterated truth and justice is a right of the people of Pakistan, the real sovereign masters of this Country. To this end, Honourable Court may, if deemed appropriate, graciously consider the following:-
a. May kindly summon Mr Mansoor Ijaz to appear before the Honourable Court as he alone holds the real evidence, as claimed by him. He has already, at a number of occasions, indicated his willingness to do so, through the print and electronic media.
b. May kindly demand forensic examination of the computers and all the cell phones and Black Berry Telephones used since May 2011 till date by the both, Mr Mansoor Ijaz and our Ex Ambassador to the US.
c. May kindly consider retrieval of the Call Record Data related to this incident from the Black Berry as well as other service providers, if any.
10. Under the circumstances, the answering Respondent shall comply with all the directions given by this Honourable Court in the matter and render necessary assistance to its appointed commission whenever so required.