The popular notion about the Swiss case against President Zardari and Shaheed Benazir Bhutto is that this case was suspended by the Swiss authorities after Attorney General, on behalf of the Pakistan Government had requested for it. This letter by the AG was written after the NRO was signed and all politically motivated cases against the Political leadership would be suspended.
This notion is put on its head by revelation of a document that purports to be the decision on the Swiss case by the Public Prosecutor.
This decision actually states that the case against President Zardari was not closed purely because of the letter. In fact, the Public Prosecutor seems to have continued to deduce the case proceedings, weighing in all the evidence in front of him.
The decision finally states that because of all the evidence, including the witness testimonies (like the owner of the Jewellery Shop claiming never to have met Ms. Bhutto etc) and the letter from the AG. Court then made a decision based on the provided evidence that the case was to be closed.
Now it is odd that this information hasn’t yet been discussed, not least in the highest court of the land by the most brilliant minds of the country. That this may lead to many questioning the veracity of the said decision. But the report looks to be genuine.
Question is that after writing such an extensive report as to why the case is closed, including destroying all the evidence that was presented, would the same public prosecutor initiate proceedings again?
Would a letter from a reluctant Government change his mind? what fresh evidence has come to light? if none, then its highly unlikely that after all this hoopla, if a letter does reach the Swiss Authorities, they are likely to disregard it stating case is already closed based on unsatisfactory evidence (or they’d be red-faced themselves)
If the Prosecutor has made a cogent reasoning for the decision, for them to about turn, without any evidence would be highly embarrassing. Swiss Legal System prides itself of being free from Political involvement, it if they did turn 180 degrees, it would be admitting political involvement. In addition to this, they have already been told to initiate the case, then told no case to answer, then now if again asked to re-initiate, they are highly going to like such non-serious attitude from a Sovereign State. Finally if there is no new evidence, and prosecutor has himself destroyed all the remaining evidence, what new evidence is there to suggest re-initiation of prosecution?
Doing away with President’s Impunity both National and International to do what? let a district level prosecutor say to our Supreme Court – “no case!” –
This begs the questions, why is Supreme Court wanting this to happen so badly? Is the court been made aware of this document? or have they been misinformed?