Islamabad, August 12: Pakistan has said it is ready to take action against Jamaat-ud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed but added India should give “concrete evidence” that stands “legal scrutiny” and holds him responsible for the Mumbai attacks.
India has maintained that it has provided ample evidence about Saeed’s role in the Mumbai attacks and Pakistan should follow it up and initiate legal proceedings against the JuD chief.
Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi insisted that his country was committed to bringing the perpetrators of 26/11 to justice but could not give any specific time-frame for conclusion of the trial in the case as the judiciary is independent.
He termed as “preposterous” any “suggestion that there is some sort of nexus” between ISI and Mumbai attacks, rubbishing the contention by Pakistani-American Laskhar-e-Toiba operative David Headley in this regard.
“The Government of Pakistan has detained Hafiz Saeed several times but for the lack of evidence, our courts would order his release,” Qureshi said in an email interview.
“We are ready to take action. We have asked India to share with us in case they have some concrete evidence which could stand legal scrutiny,” he said.
Qureshi was responding when asked to comment on India’s persistent demand for action against Saeed who had become a sticking point between the two countries.
The fresh dossier, containing more information about Saeed’s role in 26/11 attacks on the basis of Headley’s revelations, was given by Home Minister P Chidambaram to his Pakistani counterpart Rahman Malik during his visit to Islamabad in June.
Noting that courts take decisions on legal merit, Qureshi said, “We, therefore, did not find it out of the ordinary when the Indian nationals accused in the Mumbai trial were acquitted by the Indian court for lack of sufficient evidence.”
He was referring to the acquittal in May of Fahim Ansari and Sabaudin Ahmed, who were accused of conducting a recce and preparing maps of the 26/11 targets. The Mumbai trial court acquitted them for lack of evidence.
–Agencies–