London, Report By Brig. (Retd) Usman Khalid: The Prime Minister of Pakistan, Yousaf Raza Gilani, appeared before the Supreme Court upon having been indicted for ‘contempt of court’.

The contempt occurred when the President and the Prime Minister said to the press that it was the decision of Pakistan People Party (PPP) that their government would NOT write to the Swiss Courts that had been investigating a case of ‘money laundering’ case against the President of Pakistan, Mr. Asif Ali Zardari and two deceased persons – Benazir Bhutto, and Begum

Nusrat Bhutto.

In 2009 the Supreme Court had judged that the NRO (National Reconciliation Ordinance) that had given amnesty to thousands of criminals who had avoided arrest and due process of law by absconding or other legal tricks, was illegal ab initio. The Supreme Court ordered that all the cases closed in consequence of the illegal ordinance should be re-opened.

Since one of the erstwhile absconders – Asif Zardari - is now the President of Pakistan, a lively debate has been going on whether he was eligible for the office he now holds at the time of his election; and where is the money – reported to be 60 million US Dollars – that was released by the Swiss Court on the authority of a letter written by then Attorney General of Pakistan informing it of the Government of Pakistan withdrawing from the case and having no claim over the money allegedly laundered by the Bhuttos and Mr Zardari.

It has emerged that the letter by the Attorney General - Malik Abdul Qayyum – had not been authorised. He has since been charged for fraud.

The PPP stalwarts have tried to portray the case as the ‘trial of the grave’ of much loved Benazir Bhutto. It is not. A deceased person cannot be tried in any court. The 60 million Dollars released by the Swiss Court are believed to have been transferred to account(s) where the ultimate beneficiary is President Zardari.

This information is available but being technically confidential, it can only be made public by the Swiss bank on the order of the court that unfroze the account. The PPP stalwarts have relied on two props to prevent the information being made public and the money returned to the rightful owners – the people of Pakistan.

The first prop is political – portraying the insistence of the Supreme Court on the letter being written to the Swiss Court as ‘trial of Benazir’s grave’. That is patently absurd.

The Supreme Court wants that the unlawful and unauthorised request by the Malik Abdul Qayyum as Attorney General to the Swiss Court be revoked. The second prop is that the letter cannot be written as the President is entitled to immunity from prosecution in a criminal case under Article 182 of the Constitution of Pakistan and also under International Law.

That is also absurd; writing to the Swiss Court to revoke the illegal withdrawal of Pakistan from the case and title to the money laundered doe not remotely involve the person of the President except that money may presently be lying in his account.

President Asif Zardari, in his past career as a prisoner, avoided appearing before a court for eleven years often on the basis of chronic illness, which included dementia. His Prime Minister – Mr Gilani – appears to have chosen to follow in his footsteps.

He could have tendered an ‘unconditional apology’ to the Court and the case could have come to an end. A letter to the Swiss Court revoking the withdrawal of Pakistan from the case of money laundering against Mr Zardari and others will have to be written in any case.

If the President enjoys immunity from prosecution in a criminal case under International Law, as most law experts believe he does, he has nothing to fear. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Swiss Court can pass a sentence on money laundering which is a criminal offence which has yet to be proved.

But that does not mean that the President is allowed to keep the 60 million Dollars in his account; that money must be returned to Pakistan. The Prime Minister is represented by a clever lawyer – Aitzaz Ahson – who may well be able to confuse the issue by dilatory tactics prolonging the proceedings.

In the past, the Supreme Court has stayed focussed on the letter to the Swiss court. It must continue to stay focussed on that point. If the Prime Minister refuses, he would clearly be in contempt and should be given a custodial sentence.

The people of Pakistan expect that the Supreme Court would find out where did the laundered money go after it was unfrozen by the Swiss Court. Further action might follow the revelation but without that information the country would be playing into the hands of criminals that dominate politics in Pakistan.