IB chief gets extension

 

ISLAMABAD: The Director General of the Intelligence Bureau (IB), Aftab Sultan, who was to retire on reaching the age of superannuation on Wednesday, was asked by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to continue till the ‘reforms’ being introduced in the spy agency were implemented.
“Sultan is likely to serve for another year. He also had the option of getting three-year posts of the government,” a senior official told The News.He said that the extension was given as the officer had been working to the satisfaction of the prime minister. The IB’s main job is to assist the law enforcement agencies in counter-terrorism efforts.

The official said the IB was specifically contributing a lot in Karachi and the interior of Sindh in catching criminals and terrorists.The IB recently got a huge amount of funds from the government to replace its outdated equipment and gadgets. The surveillance tools of the IB became obsolete and outmoded long ago as they had not been upgraded after 1999, the official said.

He said that neither Pervez Musharraf nor the subsequent governments paid any attention to the poor state of the IB, which had affected its performance.The second major handicap the IB faced was the serious deficiency of manpower. To overcome it, the ban on recruitments in the IB was lifted by the prime minister some time back, and resultantly recruitments were made.

The official said the police could not get the requisite assistance unless the IB was sufficiently equipped with modern gadgetry and manpower.The IB played a key role in tracking down the attackers who struck the Sindh High Court judge Justice Maqbool Baqar and wounded him grievously. Besides, the agency is doing a comprehensive job in the anti-terror war.

At one time, the counter-terrorism duty was taken back from the IB but it was assigned to it again. Like most prime ministers, Nawaz Sharif is relying too much on the IB. While civilian rulers generally want to strengthen the IB, military dictators ignore it totally and pay more attention to the army or army-led spy agencies.

LHC summons defence secy, ISI, IB, MI DGs, Punjab IG police

 

RAWALPINDI: The Lahore High Court (LHC), Rawalpindi Bench, on Thursday reissued notices to the secretary Ministry of Defence, director generals (DGs) of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Intelligence Bureau (IB) and Military Intelligence (MI) and Punjab inspector general of police (IG) to appear in person before it in the case of a missing person from Wah Cantt.
Justice Ibadur Rahman Lodhi issued the order before the case was adjourned till April 7. The court took strong notice of non-appearance of any of these officials in Thursday’s hearing. The case was filed by Nageena Bibi through Taufeeq Asif, advocate, against the disappearance of her son, Khan Badshah.

The court was told that the government officers could not come due to security risks. The court then directed the defence secretary to make sure not only his presence but also that of the heads of three intelligence agencies. The Punjab chief secretary was told to make sure that the IG should be present in the court on April 7.

IHC stays illegal promotions, transfers in IB

 

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday stayed the ‘illegal transfers and promotions’ in the Intelligence Bureau (IB) besides seeking a reply from the agency’s director general (DG), according to Online.
A single bench of the IHC, comprising Justice Noorul Haq Qureshi, also stayed the meeting of the IB’s Central Selection Board (CSB) to be held today (Wednesday) to take decisions about the promotions and transfers of officers.

Justice Qureshi passed these orders after petitioner Muhammad Arif Zulqarnain, Deputy Director IB, contended before the court that the CSB was going to promote blue-eyed junior officers from Grade 18 to 19 only six days before the DG IB, who will chair the CSB, was to retire.

The IHC bench directed the IB and the Establishment Division to submit para wise comments within a fortnight with observations that the high court could not determine seniority of an official.

The petitioner, through his counsel Hafiz Arfat Ahmad Chaudhry, adopted before the court the IB senior administration through its CSB was going to promote junior officers into Grade 19 while ignoring the seniority list.

The petitioner alleged that the DG IB, who is going to retire on April 02, 2014, was going to grant premature promotions to some blue-eyed persons from BPS-18 to BPS-19 in an extraordinary and unusual haste, ignoring seniority of the petitioner that was illegal.

The petitioner contended that he had an excellent academic background. He joined the IB on June 26, 2001 as Assistant Director in BPS-17 through the Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC) and was placed at serial No2 on the seniority list determined by the FPSC. There is no adverse report that has ever been issued against the petitioner. Rather, he has always been appreciated by his superiors and in 2006 he was promoted to BPS-18.

He said in order to get further elevation to the post of director in BPS-19, it is mandatory for an official to have a minimum 12 years of service besides completing the mandatory promotional courses.

The petitioner made a request to his higher authorities in the year 2009 to send him for mandatory promotional courses so that his case could be placed before the CSB but the request was not accepted due to his engagement in sensitive and important official assignments.

However, all batch-mates of the petitioner and several junior officers were sent to attend the courses that they completed in due time. This “discriminatory policy” will eventually lead to denial of promotion to the petitioner. The petitioner contended it was evident from the record that it was the decision of the higher authorities not to send him on promotional courses for over four years and no fault could be attributed to the petitioner in this regard.

After numerous requests of the petitioner, he has been nominated for the promotional course which is going to conclude on April 11, 2014, enabling him for consideration for promotion as director in BPS-19. The petitioner contended that he had learnt that the respondents were going to hold a meeting of the CSB on March 26, 2014 promoting their favourites. The petitioner immediately moved a departmental representation but received no response thereto. The act of the respondents is based on ‘patent malafide’ and the same grossly contradicts the fundamental rights of the petitioner, he contended.

The petitioner told the court that despite his best efforts, he could not procure necessary documents from his department for the assistance of this court. The petitioner has been denied access to the concerned documents, including the seniority list.

He claimed being the senior-most officer currently serving in BPS-18. The petitioner prayed to the court to direct the respondents to hold a meeting of the CSB for grant of promotion from BPS-18 to BPS-19 after completion of ongoing Mid Career Management Course that is going to conclude on April 11, 2014.The court will take up this matter after the respondents submit their comments.