Offence is Pak's Best Defence on 26/11

Twelve days before India and Pakistan National Security Advisers (NSAs) held a secret meeting in Bangkok, Pakistan had complained to the United Nations about lack of cooperation by the Indian authorities in its probe in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks case.

Pakistan had also handed over UN Security Council copy of a letter written to India in which it sought eight new material evidences — which include GPS, satellite and cell phones and weapons — used by the terrorists. Pakistan wants India to hand over these material evidences to it along with recovery memos and has claimed that nearly six and half years after the Mumbai attacks it still does not have much in hand to move ahead in the probe.

On November 25, Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to UN Maleeha Lodhi submitted the copy of the letter written by Foreign Secretary Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry to his Indian counterpart S Jaishankar with regard to the 26/11 case. “The letter from the Foreign Secretary provides details of lack of cooperation by the Indian authorities in the Government of Pakistan’s efforts to effectively prosecute the accused in the Mumbai attacks and lack of prosecution by the Indian authorities of the accused in the Samjhauta Express attack, in which 42 innocent Pakistanis lost their lives,” Lodhi said in the covering note.

The letter is dated September 8, 2015, fifteen days after Pakistan called off the August 24 talks between the NSAs of the two countries in New Delhi.

“We do not understand why these matters needed to be raised in this manner. These matters can certainly be discussed bilaterally in the comprehensive dialogue that has begun with Pakistan,” sources in the Government said. India insists that 99 per cent of the evidence in the 26/11 case lies within Pakistan as the entire attacks were planned, financed and carried out by people there, while Pakistan says that the incident took place in India and all the material evidences were, therefore, in the possession of the Indian authorities. “Pakistan would have got a full reply to its queries if the NSA talks had held as scheduled in August,” said the Indian Government source.

In his letter to Jaishankar, Chaudhry said that since the Mumbai trial is entering its final stages in Pakistan, it urgently needed additional evidence that is in possession of India. He asked India to hand over to Pakistan all articles collected and recovered by the Indian investigating officers during investigation into Mumbai terror attacks, along with their recovery memos.

Besides, Pakistan has said that all individuals who had provided material evidence in connection with the case will need to be made available to make statements under oath and to be cross-examined by Pakistan. Pakistan has also complained that the statement of the Indian Magistrate, who alleged that the terrorists were maintaining communication with their handlers in Pakistan, and pink foam (material evidence) were also not provided to it.

Pakistan has said that its prosecution still does not have the required material evidence from Indian authorities to proceed in the case hence it cannot be blamed for slow pace or lack of progress in this case.

However, Indian special public prosecutor in the case Ujjwal Nikam has demolished Pakistan letter to the UN saying twice their Judicial Commission has visited India and cross-examined four persons -- two doctors, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate -- who recorded judicial confession of terrorist Ajmal Kasab -- and the chief investigating officer in the case. He said Pakistan has never asked for these hard material evidences so far. Nikam added that no country can part with such crucial evidence for the fear of tampering.

“All evidences as dossier have gone to Pakistan. There own Judicial Commission had come twice and examined four persons. The same commission can give in writing if it wants anything more and their experts can come and examine any evidence in India if the Government permits. But how can any material evidence be handed over to them? These are concrete proof we have. Moreover, the trial against Abu Jundal in the 26/11 case is still not complete in India and I would need these same material evidence to confront Abu Jundal and David Headley during the course of trial,” Nikam told The Pioneer. According to Nikam, the Pakistan Judicial Commission can revisit and examine the Rspink foam’ in India if Government permits.

Interestingly, between 5 January 2009 and 25 April 2010 numerous dossiers were exchanged between India and Pakistan but Chaudhry said since the information was in Hindi it could not be used by Pakistan in the absence of attested translation. India sent the English translation in June 2009. 

Pakistan claimed it had also approached the Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble for assistance in getting additional investigative leads from the four countries. The replies to the 32 questions were received incomplete which is why some of the important queries still remained unanswered in this case.

Pakistan registered a criminal case against nine accused, including Ajmal Kasab, on February 12, 2009. Trial against Lashkar-e-Tayyeba operations commander Zaki ur Rehman Lakhvi, his associates Abdul Wajid, Mazhar Iqbal, Sadiq, Shahid Jamil, Jamil Ahmed and Younas Anjum is going on in a special Anti Terrorism Court of Islamabad for their alleged role in the Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people. 57 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far.

However, a key prosecutor witness in this case in Islamabad - school headmaster where Ajmal Kasab studied - has turned hostile and said that Kasab, the lone terrorist caught alive by India and later hanged, was alive. The headmaster was supposed to present the record of the period during which Ajmal Kasab studied in the school and other relevant record, talked otherwise. It is believed that the headmaster belongs to the native town of accused Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi and there was a possibility that he testified under Lakhvi’s pressure. It is yet to be seen if Pakistan files a case of perjury against him.