I also really like Wajahat S Khan. I think that, among the TV personalities out there, he is a pretty reliable guy. Of course, everybody makes mistakes. I think Waj made a pretty big mistake today with a post on his blog today about a “confidential email” claiming that Zardari bought a million pounds flat in London. Why is Waj spreading rumours and political propaganda?

This “confidential email” is simply another smear against Asif Zardari, as is clear from its closing lines:

This is a small reminder to the sick people in Pakistan, who were against the throwing of the shoe to a “Respected President of Pakistan abroad”!!!

They are purblind to the realities of the damage this man called Zardari has done to the nation.

But what damage would Zardari have done by buying a flat in London, if that is even the case? And why is Waj publishing a rumour that even declares that it doesn’t know the facts? The email itself says that “The final bid was made by mobile phone from inside a bullet proof car”. Is Asif Zardari the only man to own a mobile and a bullet proof car? What kind of proof is this?

Frankly, it’s quite disappointing that Waj saw fit to promote this sort of obvious political propaganda on his blog. As a respected journalist, he lends such obvious political smears an air of authority that they do not deserve. Why did he not exercise his investigative skills and do more research rather than simply repeating an obvious political rumour?

But let’s get to the meat of this email rumour, shall we? Actually, let’s see if there’s really any meat there, or if it’s just a mess of mashed pulses mixed with a handful of masala meant to fool the unsuspecting.

First, is it really newsworthy if Asif Zardari buys a flat in London? Look at other leaders. Pervez Musharraf owns a flat worth many millions of pounds. In fact, many Pakistani politicians own London flats.

The meeting took place at his apartment on the ninth floor of the Castleacre, Hyde Park Crescent.

The cost of the accommodation certainly runs into millions of pounds. Musharraf would not talk much about how he mobilised funds to purchase this because the money was ‘pooled’ by his own lecturing resources, his US-based son, Bilal, and the assistance from a friend that was not named.

It is the same locale, a few meters from the picturesque Hyde Park, where fabulously rich Pakistani politicians like Nawaz Sharif, still have or had apartments. As I reached the high security multi-storey plaza twenty minutes before the appointed time, I was greeted by a well-built Pakistani, wearing the traditional Safari suit of the same colour, and was told that Sahib has just finished his physical exercise, spanning one and a half hours.

Actually, the Sharif family are quite the wealthy landowners in London, with several properties worth millions of pounds each.

Of these, the Sharif family residence, three flats at 17 Avenfield House, 118 Park Lane alone are worth around 12 million pounds (Rs1.6 billion). According to documents available, Flagship Investments Limited, one of the companies run by the Sharif family in London, owns property worth around 10 million pounds in Central London. This does not include the value of the company’s offices. Hasan Nawaz Sharif, the son of PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif, is listed as the director of company on official documents. According to its website www.flagshipinvestments.co.uk, the company refurbishes and redevelops luxury residential properties in top end Central London locations. Sought after properties in Mayfair, Knightsbridge, Kensington and Bayswater are their primary focus. The company’s address listed on the website is Stanhope House, Stanhope Place, Marble Arch – one of the city’s priciest neighbourhoods. However, according to documents, the company moved to Tower Bridge House on St Katherine’s Way in November 2007 – a much more upscale property located near the bank of the River Thames.

The company’s website lists several properties, which include Flat 8, Burwood Place – London W2, worth 700,000 pounds (Rs96.6 million); Flat 9, Burwood Place – London W2, worth 900,000 pounds (Rs124.2 million); 10 Duke Mansions, Duke Street, London W1, worth 1,495,000 pounds (Rs206.31 million); Flat 12a, 118 Park Lane, Mayfair – London SW1, worth 475,000 pounds (Rs65.55 million); Flat 2, 36 Green Street – London W1, worth 800,000 pounds (Rs110.4 million); and, 117 Gloucester Place, London W1 (value not listed). The website also features a piece of real estate near the Buckingham Palace, which is valued at around 4,450,000 pounds. In addition, one of the properties listed on the website – 841 Neil Gwynne House, Slone Avenue – is said to be the residence of one Waqar Ahmed, listed on the documents as the Company Secretary of Flagship Investments Limited.

MQM’s Altaf Hussain owns multiple million pound properties in the UK. Evan PTI’s Imran Khan’s massive property which includes a private cricket ground for his sons was paid for with the proceeds from a London real estate deal.

Like most world leaders, Asif Zardari is wealthy. This should not be any surprise. And while it is a popular for his political opponents to spread rumours about his wealth, it is also a fact that Asif Zardari was a very successful businessman long before he ever met Benazir Bhutto and got involved with politics.

While there is no evidence that Asif Zardari is the buyer of this flat, the buyer, however anonymous right now, will come to be known. All properties in the UK have to be registered, so even if it is bought in the name of a company, the owner will be easily traceable. Why not wait until the registration is complete to say who the buyer is? Is it because this is now political opportunity to undermine the credibility of the President? That’s fine for political operatives, but not for serious journalists. I expect better, Waj.

The News recently announced the return of senior journalist Amir Mateen who was supposed to bring his 24-years of experience and write a series of profiles on political parties – “how they may have performed, changed, and developed in the two years after the last elections.” What resulted, however, is better titled, “Amir Mateen’s Gossip Column.”

Amir Mateen’s “profiles on political parties” are little more than sleazy character assassinations of leading politicians that belong in tabloid gossip magazines, not serious newspapers. Despite having 24-years of experience, Mateen has spent the past several weeks writing sensational ‘special reports’ against the nation’s top political leaders that are filled with juicy gossip and slanderous innuendo, but fail to provide any actual evidence or journalistic merit.

Two weeks ago, Mateen wrote a two-part column targeting PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif that complains that “we still don’t know enough about him.”

What are his habits; his likes and dislikes? What does he read, if at all he does? There is more emphasis on his food habits than his mental and intellectual growth, particularly after his return from exile. What are his perceptions about the rapidly changing Pakistan and the world around him?

Mateen, unfortunately, provides no answers. Instead, he dishes out the same yellow journalism and character assassination that brought us to the point of his original complaint. Consider this “analysis” by Mateen:

The PML-N offers a vague one-size-fits-all policy on most issues. The idea is to keep the mainstream swing voters in a flux and show the real teeth once the levers of power are in control. The same strategy is in practice within the party where nobody knows who is going to do what in a future power set-up. A deliberate chaos has been created where all PML-N leaders are saying all things to all people. The real position, if there is one, is only known to Nawaz Sharif.

Mateen, of course, offers no evidence. He simply says this as if idle gossip it is a proper replacement for actual investigative reporting. Actually, idle gossip makes up most of the article. Consider the following:

It is widely believed in Lahore that if your name has a suffix of Kashmiri castes like Butt, Mir, Lone, Khawaja, Dar or Banday, you have a better chance of your grievance being addressed.

Rather than actually investigate whether some families are receiving special treatment and providing the evidence, Mr. Mateen simply repeats a rumour!

Mateens descriptions of the PML-N chief are so loaded with anti-Sharif bias that they read more like an opposition press release than the work of a legitimate reporter. From part two of Mateen’s character assassination of Nawaz Sharif:

A deliberate aura has been created where he is presented almost as a cult leader with his devotees, their eyes shining with respect, are not encouraged to question his great wisdom.

Again, where is the evidence? Mateen then goes on to complain that Sharif dared to treat him with suspicion, asking “what side” he is on. Certainly this would be a strange question for a reporter, but if the reporter has decided to make a living out of writing character assassination articles without any actual facts or investigative reporting, what is he supposed to think?

Mateen goes on to admit that what he is after is not any actual reporting about politics or important issues, but sensational gossip stories filled with sex scandals:

When asked how many wives and children does Shahbaz Sharif have, he flared up instantly. It took some effort to explain that when a politician offers him or herself for a public life, he or she may not have the same rights to secrecy as a private citizen does. He was asked that if Mustafa Khar’s wives and Asif Zardari’s philandering could be discussed, why could not a journalist ask a benign question about, what the number of wives and children the chief minister of the biggest province may have.

Think of how many different issues could have been asked about. Inflation, militancy, corruption, constitution…but instead all that Mateen and his gossip brigade care about is somebody’s private affairs? What a waste.

This is truly a pity because a thorough and well reported profile of different political parties and their positions on important issues would be a great asset to to the people as they evaluate their choices. But Amir Mateen and The News are not providing fact-based reporting, merely rumours, sleazy gossip, and character assassination.

To be continued…

Today’s column by Ansar Abbasi is, once again, published as “news analysis.” Even though it is a rather incendiary opinion piece, The News (Jang) has not seen fit to put it properly on the opinion page. This is an unfortunate habit of the The News as it is quite misleading to readers.

But perhaps more unfortunate is the fact that Mr. Ansar Abbasi continues to believe that insulting rants are a proper substitute for research and reason.

Take, for example, his suggestion that, “Legally and constitutionally speaking, there is no way out for the government but to implement the Supreme Court’s order in letter and spirit. But practically if the government does this, it would mean political death of the PPP’s co-chairman against whom the corruption cases are too serious.”

Actually, this is not quite true. The constitution states in Article 248 that certain officials may not be tried while they are in office. Any cases against them will have to be heard once their term is complete.

248. Protection to President, Governor, Minister, etc.
(1) The President, a Governor, the Prime Minister, a Federal Minister, a Minister of State, the Chief Minister and a Provincial Minister shall not he answerable to any court for the exercise of powers and performance of functions of their respective offices or for any act done or purported to be done in the exercise of those powers and performance of those functions:

Provided that nothing in this clause shall be construed as restricting the right of any person to bring appropriate proceedings against the Federation or a Province.

(2) No criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the President or a Governor in any court during his term of office.

(3) No process for the arrest or imprisonment of the President or a Governor shall issue from any court during his term of office.

(4) No civil proceedings in which relief is claimed against the President or a Governor shall be instituted during his term of office in respect of anything done by or not done by him in his personal capacity whether before or after he enters upon his office unless, at least sixty days before the proceedings are instituted, notice in writing has been delivered to him, or sent to him in the manner prescribed by law, stating the nature of the proceedings, the cause of action, the name, description and place of residence of the party by whom the proceedings are to be instituted and the relief which the party claims.

This is no secret. In fact, it has been stated quite clearly by the government that this is their position. And it is not an unreasonable position, even if it is inconvenient to Ansar Abbasi’s political tirade. The Swiss prosecutor has been adamant about his refusal to reopen a case against Zardari until his term expires.

[Geneva prosecutor Daniel Zappelli] said he can’t reopen the case against Zardari, who was elected president in 2008 after years of battling corruption allegations, because he enjoys “absolute immunity” as a head of state.

“We could go further only if the competent authorities in Pakistan decide to lift the immunity of the head of state, which I do not know whether it is possible according to their constitution,” said Zappelli, speaking in English. “If not, we can’t. Absolutely not. Period.”

Ansar Abbasi then goes on to peddle outrageous rumours including that a major political party was planning to attack the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

After the NRO decision, the unnerved PPP was alleged to be even planning physical attacks on the Chief Justice of Pakistan to embarrass Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Money was also reportedly distributed amongst some student leaders of the PSF to organise demonstrations against the judiciary.

If this is true, it is a serious charge that should be taken up with the proper authorities immediately. I ask that Ansar Abbasi immediately file a grievance and reveal his evidence. Otherwise, what are we to think except that he has made the whole thing up?

Also, wasn’t it only three days earlier that this same Ansar Abbasi was condemning a foreign newspaper for quoting an unnamed source? But notice that now Abbasi does not even pretend to have heard his rumour from some “anonymous source.” Rather, he simply says it is “alleged.” Alleged by whom? Surely Ansar Abbasi does not want to be a hypocrite. Please, sir, tell us who your source is for these serious accusations.

Ansar Abbasi’s entire column is actually a poor attempt for him to play judge, jury, and executioner of Asif Zardari. Abbasi says the Supreme Court “is serious to ensure a fair trial of past corruption cases.” Perhaps they are, but Ansar Abbasi sees no need for a fair trial. Instead, he says “Allowing a fair trial to prove his innocence would be a risky gamble that everyone in the party knows is bound to be lost…”

What is the point of bothering with a trial, when Ansar Abbasi has already judged the outcome? This blog takes no position on the issue of Asif Zardari’s guilt or innocence. There is very important legal discussion about Presidential immunity, and even if the President did not enjoy this immunity, surely the courts are the proper place to hold a trial, not the last issue of The News. Perhaps Mr. Abbasi is challenging Shahid Masood to be “Chief Justice of the Media”?

Ansar Abbasi: Challenging Shahid Massod to be Chief Justice of Media?

Ansar closes his opinion by saying that, “Instead of being befooled by political slogans, the people of Pakistan deserve to know if there is any truth in the NAB’s claim…” Perhaps Mr. Abbasi would do us all the favour of ceasing his foolish political sloganeering, then, so that proper journalists can do their work. At the very least, sir, we beg of you…Learn Before Writing!

In yesterday’s article, “Journalists as spies in FATA,” Mr. Klasra claims that journalists in NWFP and FATA are secretly spies for foreign intelligence agencies. While any self-respecting editor worthy of the title would require significant evidence before putting someone’s life in mortal danger by accusing them of being a spy, no such evidence exists in the article.

But Mr. Klasra goes beyond mere conspiracy theory and outright accuses a reporter for the American newspaper Wall Street Journal by name. The reporter, Matthew Rosenberg, has been reporting from South Asia for years, typically publishing articles with such unremarkable titles as, “India Rejects US Carbon Limits Plan,” and “US Courts Former Warlords in Its Bid for Afghan Stability”. Hardly the stuff spy novels are made of.

Instead of facts, Mr. Klasra offers as evidence unsubstantiated anonymous rumours such from “an official of law enforcement agency” and loose innuendo based in unrelated facts. For example, Mr. Klasra quotes a former intelligence officer as saying that the CIA has used journalistic cover in the past. While this very well may be true, the statement does not refer to Pakistan, thus bringing no bearing on the journalists currently reporting from Pakistan. This is a textbook of example of the Fallacy of False Inference.

Mr. Klasra goes on to accuse the reporter of threatening individuals who refuse to themselves become agents. In addition to providing no evidence – not even a fabricated quote by an anonymous “official” – this accusuation by Mr. Klasra is purely ridiculous on its face. What good would a person be as a secret agent if they have to be threatened?

This situation is troublingly reminiscent of the case of another Wall Street Journal reporter, Daniel Pearl. In 2002, Daniel Pearl was brutally murdered in Karachi by al Qaeda terrorists who, like Kaswar Klasra, claimed with no evidence that the journalist was a secret agent – first of the CIA, then of the Mossad. Despite international efforts to gain the safe release of the innocent journalist, the terrorists murdered Daniel Pearl on video camera. We pray this horrific event is not repeated.

Not content with the standard level of sensational tabloid journalism The Nation has come to represent, with today’s article, Mr. Klasra drags The Nation to a new low. That his editor approved the piece demonstrates a level of irresponsibility unrivaled in her field. If any harm comes to Mr. Rosenberg, The Nation will be in part responsible. Kaswar Klasra and his editor, Shireen Mazari, will have the blood of a fellow journalist on their hands.