Saturday Sep 30, 2017
ISLAMABAD: The Intelligence Bureau (IB), in response to a petition filed in the Islamabad High Court (IHC), demanded that the petition be dismissed on the basis of being 'unnecessary,' Geo News learned on Saturday.
IB's serving assistant sub-inspector, ASI Malik Mukhtar Ahmed Shahzad, has accused senior officers of not taking action against terrorism suspects and filed a petition before the IHC, requesting it to refer the matter to the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) for a thorough probe.
Disclosing the details of its secret operations will impact the department's performance negatively, IB responded to the IHC.
"The petition should be dismissed on the grounds of being frivolous, as it demands the disclosure of details pertaining to secret operations and task objectives," the response says. "If disclosed, these details will compromise national security as they will expose the administrative units of the department."
The department further said that IB is part of the federal legislative list linked to the security of Pakistan and it is classified as a division on the federal level, however, it has not been notified as one due to the secretive nature of its operations.
IB notifications are not published in Gazette of Pakistan, all of its correspondence is considered a national secret, and the name of its functionaries are kept secret, the response says.
The allocated departmental budget is also not published in the official budget document, the response said.
"If the required information is submitted to the court, the secret details will become a public document, which can potentially deteriorate the country's foreign relations," IB has stated.
"The additional documents attached to the writ petition are a violation of service rules," the response says. "Employees of the department are not allowed to retain copies of reports based on confidential information."
The petitioner has filed 14 petitions against the department in total and has 'frequently caused trouble' for the department by doing so, the response claims, adding that the petition should be dismissed on the basis of being unnecessary.