Why everyone shies away from naming the culprit

ISLAMABAD: Neither the probe of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) into the leaked photo of Hussain Nawaz Sharif from its interrogation room named the ‘culprit’ nor did any leader of the government or the opposition identify him.

Some commentators pointed out that the Supreme Court also did not ask any question in this regard. The official status or rank of the ‘culprit’ was also withheld. Although, everyone shied away from naming him or his organisation, it is widely believed that this man belonged to an intelligence agency that has been assigned the audio and video recording of the question-answer sessions of those appearing before the JIT.

Obviously, had this ‘culprit’ come from a civilian organisation, all and sundry would have conveniently and daringly identified him. All of them showed restraint because the accused hailed from an intelligence agency.

The disclosure of the JIT that the accused was repatriated to his parent department where due action is being taken against him gave a lie to the widespread allegation of the opposition parties that it was the government that had leaked Hussain’s picture to earn public sympathy.

The photo was certainly leaked to ridicule and damage the Sharif family, but the move backfired as instead it created sympathy for it.

The JIT initiated the investigation into the photo leak only after the Sharif family agitated it in the Supreme Court and demanded a commission to probe it. Besides, it also raised a storm over it, painting the JIT as partisan and biased.

The photo taken from the CCTV feed pertained to the first appearance of Hussain before the JIT on May 28. Two weeks later, the JIT has tried to settle it once and for all by telling the apex court that the concerned person has been recognised and sent back to his parent department.

A lot of muck was kicked off by the opposition parties asserting that the government leaked the photo as it had access to the Federal Judicial Academy (FJA), but the official circles kept denying that they had anything to do with it. They also stressed that the FJA has its own security system in place and the venue was out of bound for them.

It is also believed that disciplinary proceedings that would be taken against the “culprit” would not be made public because such actions are not divulged when it comes to the intelligence agencies.

Questions have been raised about the transparency of in-camera proceedings being held by the JIT emphasising that it can’t protect its own affairs.

It is an open question what action the apex court would order against the accused who was found to have publicly released Hussain’s picture. Queries have also been raised whether the photo leak was an independent job of the concerned person.