Ulema rejects allegations against Jang Group/ Geo

KARACHI: Lauding Jang Group Services for the country, Ulema and religious scholars dubbed allegations against the country’s largest media group as violation of religious and ethical norms.

Mufi Naeem of Jamia Binoria said that the Jang Group’s record of 75 years shows it stood by nation whenever it stuck in any difficult situation.

Tehreek-e-Ahle Hadith chief Prof Younis Siddiqui said the Jang and Geo policies filled people’s hearts with the love for Pakistan.

Chief of Idara Tanzeemul Makatib Allama Syed Razi Jaffar Naqvi said that treason allegations could not be leveled against anyone without substantial proves.

Allama Kokab Noorani also expressed similar views and said nobody could be declared traitor without proofs

GEO’s response to Imran Khan’s allegations

KARACHI: A Jang Group spokesman has given the following response to the allegations leveled by PTI chief Imran Khan in a press conference on Friday.

Allegation 1: GEO rigged the 2013 elections along with Chief Justice, bureaucracy and the PML-N. GEO announced PML-N as the winner at 11:05pm when only 19% of votes had been cast. GEO influenced the returning officers to swing the elections in favour of PML-N and showed Nawaz Sharif announcing himself as the winner at 11:23pm.

GEO’s Response 1:

Rigging can’t take place during vote count as votes are counted in front of party representative at each polling station. Rigging takes place before vote counting during the actual voting process. Voting finished between 5-6pm. There is no way GEO or any media could influence rigging or be involved in rigging at 11:05pm which was 5 hours after voting had closed. Kamran Khan and GEO News name shouldn’t be tarnished just because Kamran Khan showed partial results at 11:05pm.

In fact, Ayaz Khan of Express News said the following during Express News election transmission at 10:21 pm. Mey yeh dekh raha hoon ke PML-N centre mein hukoomat bana sakti hey or Punjab mey unki government banegi aur Sindh mey PPP government banaey gi or mein yeh dekh raha hoon ke opposition bhi PPP ki hi hogi.

Nawaz Sharif’s speech was shown by all channels and in fact GEO News was not even the first channel to show the speech.

Regarding showing partial results, whether based on 19% or 30% polling station results, a frequent was flashing on screen and being repeated verbally by our newscaster letting our viewers know that these are non-official and partial results. All over the world partial results are given in elections and in our case we were also showing per constituency what % of the polling station results have come in. This was not a projection but actual results that we were getting from our correspondents of 11,000 people that day who were getting polling station results directly from polling stations and returning officers and Election Commission sources. All channels were airing partial results and the same was done in 2002 and 2008. The method that was used to announce results was consulted by Dr. Ijaz Shafi Gilani (Gallup Pakistan) and Salman Naseer Danish (PTI) and was statistically safe. This is verified by comparing the result that GEO had given to other channels and final election results announced by the Election Commission. The difference between all channels was less than 10% though GEO was airing the results first due to its larger network and experience. If GEO had rigged the elections, were all top 5 news channels also involved as they were airing similar results? All local and international poll projections had also predicted similar trend as of the elections, does that mean they were also involved in rigging the elections with GEO?

Mudassir Rizvi, CEO FAFEN which was the largest network of voter monitoring and fraud monitoring, told GEO News on camera yesterday, “Geo News is not responsible for rigging, we can only hold those responsible that had position of authority. We had an information sharing agreement with GEO which aired much of our data regarding rigging.” GEO News also received a note of appreciation for our contribution for elections 2013 transmission from FAFEN.

Iftikhar Ahmad, Director Elections at Jang Group and senior anchorperson, has challenged Imran Khan to an open debate to prove his allegations and provide evidence. Iftikhar Ahmad also said, “Why these allegations were not part of the white paper that was released by PTI on elections rigging? Why is GEO being attacked now? And if Khan wants to improve election reforms then shouldn’t it be one year before the next elections, why now? I think Khan needs to be more mature and realise why he actually lost and show more sportsman sprit.”

However at the same time we do want to acknowledge that rigging did take place and it is most unfortunate. GEO would support any positive reforms PTI would like to recommend that will help stop rigging. In fact, GEO aired hours of footage on rigging and exposed it from morning of the elections day. At least two hours of rigging footage that went on air can be provided if required. Hamid Mir, Iftikhar Ahmad and Sohail Warraich did programmes on rigging the same night of elections. Hamid Mir did a two hours show of rigging allegations of Dr Alvi of PTI.

Allegation 2: PTI and Imran Khan have also falsely accused Jang/GEO group of receiving special favour by the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) to acquire rights for the cricket series against Sri Lanka through its Chairman Mr. Najam Sethi who also hosts a programme on the Network. Khan said this was done as a favour for rigging the elections.

GEO Response 2: We have already in writing told Imran Khan that the whole process was conducted in open and transparent manner and was witnessed by both bidders (GEO Super and Ten Sports) and a bid committee comprised of Ehsan Mani as chairman legal department of PCB, retired judge, member of BOG, COO, CFO of PCB and independent international auditors (Price Waterhouse and Coopers). In fact Ehsan Mani is also board member of Shaukat Khanum and a friend of Khan. We had requested please consult with Ehsan Mani if he agrees with your allegation or meet the auditors?

Ten Sports won the South Africa series rights through the bidding process and GEO Super won the Sri Lanka series rights due to higher bid amounts. Ten Sports is a 100 percent Indian owned company and yet no one raised an eyebrow against them or wrote articles one after the other. Due to interim appointments, the Supreme Court, at that time, did not allow the PCB to enter into any long-term sale of rights that is why the bidding for the matches was for two series only and not 5 years. Also Khan has alluded that we had rigged the elections and in return we got one 14 day match rights? GEO and Jang Group have lost over 600 crores for supporting the lawyers movement fighting a military dictator. Jang Group had also been shut down by Nawaz Sharif in 1998-99 and was boycotted by PPP as well in previous government who had banned all advertising to the largest media group. If GEO didn’t sell out then why would it do now, and that too for Pakistan vs Sir Lanka rights?

Allegation 3: Zara Sochiye of Geo had received sponsorship of 20 million pounds, and Aman Ki Asha was sponsored by Indians through Doordarshan. This was in the Supreme Court Media Commission report.

GEO Response 3: Yes this was in the Media Commission report but it was not part of the main report but as part of minutes with PEMRA, which GEO had been suing because of its partiality. In fact Supreme Court had asked the government to confirm these allegations and after receiving a response asked chairman PEMRA to prove these allegations after which chairman PEMRA denied the charges and also apologised in writing. It is interesting to note that all these allegations have been raised in past and categorically denied with evidence and a clarification. Aman Ki Asha has been praised by Imran Khan in Parliament. Regarding Indian funding, why would RAW want Pakistan to want peace with India? Jang Group would also like to put on record that Aman Ki Asha and Zara Sochiye (education effort) was started after consultation and feedback of senior most members of the Armed Forces. Aman Ki Asha is an independent project conceived by Jang Group to promote peace with India while respecting our core interests.

Zara Sochieye education campaign has been declared openly and its sources of funding (majority of which is funded by Jang Group related companies) have also been shared and its accounts audited by Price Waterhouse Coopers. The campaign to promote education reform was appreciated by all political parties and education related NGOs including scores of PTI representatives. All editorial control and project conception was done by MKRF, local NGO affiliated with founder of Jang Group. Zara Sochieye campaign was aired on PTV, and four regional channels and 4 radio stations apart from GEO channels.

Imran Khan seems to be alluding to foreign funding as an evil. One can ask him if PTI government itself in KP accepts 100s of millions of dollars’ worth of aid from US and UK governments. Recent polio campaign was also funded from international sources and PTI itself is funded in part by US, UK, Indian citizens. Most of these funds are used for good purposes and have done a lot of social good. Imran Khan also in previous interview suggested GEO has taken foreign funding and in return maybe doing campaigning against peace negotiations with the Taliban and Government of Pakistan. Imran Khan should note that GEO has done several transmission called Aman Kay Liye Kardalo where Jang Group and GEO have openly been supporting negotiation to operation as a policy.

Allegation 4: Group aired Voice of America from a fund for supporting democracy.

GEO Response 4: Again Khan seems to be alluding to American influence.

Geo is a part of the Jang Group of Publications, Pakistan’s media powerhouse with a proud history. Geo has no connection with the USA, either financial or political. Geo had sold air time to the Voice of America under a transparent commercial contract which total value was less than 3%-5% of its revenue at any given time. GEO made sure that the VOA logo is on screen throughout its broadcast. A disclaimer stipulates that the views expressed in the broadcast are not GEO’s. There was no attempt to camouflage the VOA broadcast and its contract was given to PEMRA also. GEO’s senior management also asked General Musharraf and General Shuja Pasha if they had any problem with us airing the programme and they both said no at the time. However GEO decided on its own to stop airing the programme when drone attacks frequency increased in Pakistan and has not aired the programme for over 3 years. VOA programme had aired on PTV, Express and Aaj TV but surprisingly Imran Khan has not suspected them of any wrongdoing.

It should be noted that GEO has aired (Fahrenheit 9/11, bush’s Brain, Loose Change, Cartoons about Bush, Obama, and frequently makes fun of American presidents and leadership in Hum Sub Umeed Se Hein. At the same time it has also educated viewers about the strengths of the US democratic traditions by covering the US elections, dubbing in Urdu the presidential debates and confirmation hearings. This is in line with our policy of learning from best practices.

Geo has been critical of the drone attacks, questioned US policies in Iraq and Afghanistan and exposed excesses like those taking place in Guantanamo and Abu Gharaib. In Khuda Ke Liye, released by GEO Films, American torture techniques and atrocities were openly shown and debated in a dramatic fashion. Late Ambassador Holbrooke, who was known for his abrasive side, in his stiff unemotional tone scolded the GEO reporter once on his trip to Pakistan. After telling the reporters how much USA is doing for Pakistan, Holbrooke looked towards GEO reporter and said, “US has given half of the support pledged by (the world). Please make sure that GEO reports that! GEO has reported a lot of anti-US stuff. Now you should tell the truth to the people of Pakistan that US is on your side”. In Wikileaks it was revealed that US Embassy has written a cable to Washington saying GEO is working against the interests of the USA. It complained that Hamid Mir had done a programme exposing that Blackwater was in Islamabad among other things.

We would like to ask Imran Khan why he doesn’t ask owners of a channel that aired in India, which earns a lot of money. It is pertinent to mention that when no Pakistani TV channel is allowed to be aired in India, then how come that particular group manages to run its transmissions there. The particular TV channel and its anchorperson also tried to label us traitors by terming a genuine investigative story on Ajmal Kasab as propaganda. We stand by our story and believe that the truth, no matter how bitter, is more patriotic than a lie, no matter how sweet.

Another competitor who was in smoking business makes most of its money from business partnerships which are with American and Indian companies. Similarly they have an agreement with an American media outlet, whereby they provide a foreign newspaper along with their daily newspaper, which is owned by Jews, with their own local newspaper. Will Khan ask why Shireen Mazari will never ask them any questions? Will she tell Khan that three mainstream news channels bureaus in Washington DC were paid by US State Department funds and GEO News is the only one that funds its own bureau in Washington DC, NY and London.

We would like to clarify here that we are not against any such business partnerships as long as they are legal and transparent but are mentioning this only to underline double standards. We request our viewers and readers to ask why is that you will not see a single conspiracy theory about these other media groups in social media but only bashing of one media group? What has GEO and Jang Group been doing that it gets punished for? Zara Sochieye.

Lastly and sadly we had approached Imran Khan through Asad Umar and Jehangir Tareen in writing to please arrange a meeting with Imran Khan. After this couldn’t be done and Khan was still attacking GEO we gave the following offer on 20th February 2014-

“Kindly please form a committee that will investigate the accusations against us, please give it a 30 days deadline, and let the committee review all the contents and they can ask us any questions or hear our point of view as well and then if it feels we are guiltily we will give you an hour of our prime in which PTI can make its findings shard with our audiences.

Our request would be that that committee contains only neutral people and not people have a known biased against us.You need to know that these allegations are serious and personal for us.”

But instead of confronting us with questions and evidence Shireen Mazari has convinced Imran Khan to attack us through press conferences and certain sections of the media with competing interests.

Senior journalist challenges Imran to prove allegations

ISLAMABAD: PTI chief Imran Khan’s rigging allegations against Geo have baffled many as to how a TV channel could change the results of elections by airing the speech of a leader which was also telecast by all other major channels. Seasoned journalist Iftikhar Ahmad, who headed Geo’s election transmission, has challenged Imran to have a debate so that his allegations could be better judged.

Addressing a press conference on Friday, days after the star anchor of the channel Hamid Mir was shot six times, Imran said Geo played a role in rigging by airing the speech of PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif at around 11.23pm on May 11, 2013, more than six hours after completion of polling process.

However, Imran did not explain as to why other channels did not commit any rigging by airing the same speech of Nawaz Sharif at the same time.

Imran whose party is governing Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province, conveniently ignored the fact that immediately after Mr Sharif’s speech on May 11, Geo also aired a “victory announcement” by senior PTI leader Asad Umar who claimed that his party would form government in the KP.

“If we go by the logic of Imran Khan how can (PTI MNA) Asad Umar tell before the completion of counting that PTI would form government in KP?” asked Iftikhar Ahmad who headed the Geo’s election transmission.

“How can Geo be held responsible for change in the election results for airing the speech of Nawaz Sharif six hours after the polling time? Only workers of the political party (PTI) could be held responsible for leaving the polling stations before the announcement of results as it was their job to oversee the counting process and get a signed copy of result from the polling staff,” he added.

The seasoned journalist said it was an international practice that media outlets keep their cameras and other devices at the offices of political parties to cover any possible development during and after the elections,” he said.

Iftikhar Ahmad also challenged Imran to hold a live debate with him on allegations of rigging against Geo. “Let us have a live debate on the issue so that people can decide what had actually happened.”

He also recalled that Geo also aired PTI’s allegation of rigging in Hamid Mir’s talk show at around midnight on May 11 and party’s senior leader Arif Alvi was given ample time to voice his opinion on the issue.

According to election experts, usually the results of majority of seats are known to contesting candidate within a couple of hours of polling even before the official announcement.“The party which has polling agents present in the polling stations can get the idea of results within two to three hours as the entire counting process takes place in front of all the polling agents and presiding officer is allowed to give a signed copy of result to each polling agent,” said Kanwar Dilshad who remained the longest serving Secretary of Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

Dilshad said it is not difficult for the leaders of major political parties and journalists to get the unofficial results prior to announcement by the ECP.“Normally the Commission does not announce the unofficial and unconfirmed results until it receives complete result from each and every polling station,” he said.

But after the voting, leaders of political parties usually maintain contact with their candidates who keep getting immediate results from every polling station through their respective polling agents, Dilshad added.

Commission didn’t exonerate ISI of murder allegations

ISLAMABAD: The Judicial Commission on Saleem Shahzad case had recommended the accountability of intelligence agencies through legislation noting that currently the ‘legal and organisational foundations of the two major agencies (ISI and IB) rest on mere executive orders.’ The commission stressed on ‘an urgent need for laying down a comprehensive statutory framework’ for them.
Terming it ‘high time’ to bring the agencies under legal framework, the commission had recommended their accountability at three levels: within the agency and before the minister-in-charge; before a parliamentary committee; and before a judicial forum. Defining the role of agencies, the commission said they must be kept at a distance from ‘press censorship, liaising with political parties and the conduct of foreign policy.’

The commission had recommended internal documentation and procedure of inquiry in order to investigate the allegations of misconduct by agency officials. “Without the relevant documentation, no investigation would have much chances of success and it would be hard to rule out the possibility of the agencies’ involvement in incidents like the murder of Saleem Shahzad,” the commission noted.

Highlighting the need for parliamentary oversight of the agencies, the commission said it will serve two purposes: (i) improving the efficiency of agencies; (ii) preventing excesses through oversight and ensuring public confidence in the agencies.

It further noted that in extreme cases where internal review as well as parliamentary review is not sufficient, the agencies may also be held accountable to a specially constituted judicial forum.

A special judicial oversight mechanism may be set up for dealing fairly and effectively with complaints against the agencies, whether emanating from the media or from other sectors of the society, the commission said. “While the forum should be of a general nature, particular importance should be given in this regard to the complaints of the press.”

The role of agencies had come under question. Like Hamid Mir, Saleem Shahzad had also conveyed threats to his life from the ISI and the commission had not absolved the agency of the allegations directing the police to investigate the names named by the slain journalist, Saleem.

Although, threats and acts of intimidation are denied by the ISI, the commission report noted, “Yet from the statements of the above named, the commission cannot hold that their understanding and perception about the threats etc. extended to them are misconceived, simply for the reason that it had been refuted by the ISI official.”

When so many senior and respected journalists have come forward to record their perception, noted the commission, that they found certain words, gestures and acts of ISI officials as intimidating and threatening, then it is hard to dismiss it lightly, “merely on account of a bald denial by ISI.”

“Therefore, from the overwhelming material available on the record, the commission is convinced that there are sufficient reasons to believe that the agencies, including ISI, have been using coercive and intimidating tactics in dealing with those journalists who antagonise the agency’s interest.”

Neither did the government act upon the commission’s recommendations nor did the police pursue the investigation into the Saleem Shahzad’s murder.

As far as the commission’s recommendations about legislation for intelligence agencies are concerned, it declared them ‘necessary to ensure that the agencies remain law-abiding and also that the public perceives them as such.’

This would require a serious effort from parliament, the report said. The commission report goes on: ‘In various countries of the world, intelligence agencies were first created under executive orders, but subsequently brought on a statutory footing to improve their level of accountability. It is high time we brought the same change in Pakistan.”

Whatever the details, the framework adopted for intelligence legislation must ensure constitutional standards of accountability.

The agencies can be held accountable at three levels: within the agency and before the minister-in-charge; before a parliamentary committee (and thus the parliament and the public); and before a judicial forum, said the report.

For improving the system of Internal Administrative Accountability for the agencies, the commission proposed statute should delineate, among other things, the purpose and object of various agencies.

Duties which fall beyond the competence of these agencies, such as press censorship, liaising with political parties and the conduct of foreign policy should be expressly excluded from their mandate. Given our current crisis, being explicit about these matters would be more than worth it, said the commission report.

The chain of command of the agencies should be clearly demarcated, the report added. The structure should be designed such that the minister-in-charge as well as the head of the agency is able to ensure internal administrative accountability. Therefore, in case of an alleged wrongdoing, the first level of inquiry should be from within the agencies. In this regard, it may be useful to set up an internal but independent office for review, such as a counsel general, an inspector general of intelligence (Australia) or auditor, whose job is to assist the minister-in-charge and/or the head of the agency in ensuring compliance with ministerial policy as well as with legal and constitutional limits, explains the commission report.

Emphasizing on the need for a more accountable work culture, the reports notes, the work-culture of the agencies may also need some change if oversight of any sort upon them, internal, parliamentary or judicial, is to be meaningful. In this regard, the proposed statute may require them to adopt by-laws which mandate their operatives to follow internationally-recognized Standard Operating Procedures (SOP).

The procedures should be defined in such a manner so as to improve the level of documentation, according to the report. In case of a complaint of misconduct, the relevant documentation should be handed over to the investigators for a proper inquiry. This change is absolutely necessary for increased accountability. Otherwise, without the relevant documentation, no investigation would have much chances of success and it would be hard to rule out the possibility of the agencies’ involvement in incidents like the murder of Saleem Shahzad.

For improving the system of democratic accountability for the agencies, the commission said they should also be made directly accountable to parliament. In this regard, parliament should consider creating bipartisan standing committees on intelligence in both houses of parliament. There are numerous such committees in parliaments around the world. The parliament may consider and deliberate upon various existing models of legislative accountability of the intelligence community to tailor the solution most appropriate for our context.

The aim of parliamentary scrutiny should be two-fold: (i) improving the efficiency of the agencies; (ii) preventing excesses through oversight and ensuring public confidence in the agencies.

For improving the system of judicial accountability for the agencies, the commission report said that in extreme cases where internal review as well as parliamentary review is not sufficient, the agencies may also be held accountable to a specially-constituted judicial forum.

A special judicial oversight mechanism may be set up for dealing fairly and effectively with complaints against the agencies, whether emanating from the press/media, as in this case, or from other sectors of society. While the forum should be of a general nature, particular importance should be given in this regard to the complaints of the press. For this purpose, it may be useful to create an office of human rights ombudsman, the commission recommended.

NA panel to investigate allegations against MPs

ISLAMABAD: Leader of the Opposition Syed Khursheed Shah and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan on Tuesday presented themselves for audit of their accounts and assets as the National Assembly adopted a unanimous resolution for setting up of a special committee to investigate the allegation of non-payment of taxes by a number of parliamentarians.

Through the motion, the House authorised the Speaker to constitute a committee of 10 members belonging to major political parties to investigate the allegation of non-payment of taxes by a number of parliamentarians and present a report within 90 days.

The motion under Rule 244 (B) was moved by PTI members Asad Umar, Lt. Col (retd) Amirullah Marwat, Ayesha Gulalai and others.Moving the motion, Asad Umar said fingers had already been pointed at parliament regarding non-payment of taxes. He was of the view that people would not believe in verbal clarification, therefore, it was necessary to form a special committee to investigate the allegations against parliamentarians to find out who had not been paying taxes.

Speaking on the motion, Syed Khursheed Shah said that he was ready to give details of his assets and those of his family members. He further said that he and his family members did not own any assets outside the country.

He also emphasised the need for enhancing the tax-to-GDP ratio for bringing an improvement in education and health sectors as well as alleviation of poverty.Imran Khan said tax collection could not be improved unless the politicians themselves set the example.He said there were no assets in his name outside the country. “If it is proved that I own any assets outside the country, then I am ready to donate these assets to Pakistan,” he said.

Karzai phones Kerry, levels allegations against Pakistan

KABUL: In a phone call with US Secretary of State John Kerry, Hamid Karzai accused Pakistan of being behind a recent series of attacks and of blocking his government from striking a peace deal with the Taliban, the Afghan president's office said Sunday.

Karzai routinely makes such accusations against Islamabad, but his tone in recent days has been particularly pointed and direct. They come after three attacks in five days in the capital Kabul, the latest coming on Saturday when assailants fired machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades at the country's electoral commission ahead of next week's general election.

Karzai leveled allegation that the attacks were complex in nature and stage-managed by "foreign intelligence agencies," a reference to Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence.

US officials confirmed the phone call took place but declined to comment on the conversation.

 

Aamir Khan lodges complaint against false allegations on ‘Satyamev Jayate’

It was alleged that the donation money from 'Satyamev Jayate' is used for masjid construction assistance, etc.

According to reports, Bollywood actor Aamir Khan has registered a complaint with the Mumbai police post the defamatory campaign against him and ‘Satyamev Jayate’ on Facebook.
It has been alleged in the messages on social networking site facebook.com/AwakIND that when at the end of the show, Aamir asks for donations for Humanity Trust, the money is used for masjid construction assistance and placement assistance for Muslim youth.
Aamir however clarified on his official Facebook page that the messages were “malicious… wrong and baseless”.
According to reports Aamir Khan met Mumbai Police Commissioner and Joint commissioner (law and order) on March 8. The officials have assured swift investigation and action with the Cyber Cell investigating the case.
Aamir Khan’s television series ‘Satyamev Jayate’, based on bringing about awareness on various social issues, started with its second season on March 2, 2014. The first season which started in May 2012 dealt with topics like female foeticide, domestic violence and child abuse, while the second season started with the rise in rape cases and the second on the law and order and police force in the country.
On March 7 Aamir Khan took to his Facebook page and clarified that he is associated with Humanity Trust, Hanspukur, West Bengal, not the other Humanity Trust.
His message read:
Hi Guys,
False and malicious messages are circulating through various electronic media including Whatsapp, Facebook, Twitter and other social media networks alleging that donations are being sought in my television program Satyamev Jayate Season 2, in relation to an entity by the name of Humanity Trust which is claimed to be working in the field of Masjid Construction Assistance and placement assistance for Islamic youngsters. This is entirely false. I would like to clarify that Satyamev Jayate, in Season 1 was associated with Humanity Trust, Hanspukur, West Bengal which is a charitable hospital run by Dr. Ajoy Mistry and his mother Subhashini Mistry. Humanity Trust, Hanspukur, West Bengal is doing excellent work in the field of health care and provides free medical facilities to the poor. More information can be found on their website http://www.humanityhospital.org and our website http://www.satyamevjayate.in/every-life-is-precious/humanity-trust.aspx.
Please note that Humanity Trust, Hanspukur has nothing to do with Humanity Trust referred to in the malicious messages. I would like to clarify that all donations sought in SMJ are used and channelized for entirely deserving and secular causes, contrary to the content of the highly mischievous/malicious insinuations in the messages, being circulated by vested and unscrupulous interest.
These malicious messages are entirely false, wrong and baseless. I categorically deny that SMJ has anything to do with Humanity Trust as stated in the malicious messages or that we have called for donations in the name of the said entity. I urge the members of the public to disregard the said malicious message. For more information on all NGOs featured on the show, please visit our website http://www.satyamevjayate.in
Spread the love guys.
Cheers.
Aamir.