SWITCH on any of the news channels, read any newspaper, you will find all and sundry speaking about President Asif Ali Zardari’s immunity. When Article 248 of the constitution states that ‘no criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the president or a governorin any court during his term of office.’, then what is the reason for creating a hype on this topic.
The question of writing a letter to the Swiss authorities does not arise till Asif Ali Zardari completes his constitutional tenure as president of the country. ‘The president’s immunity in criminal cases had been endorsed by accountability anti-corruption courts.
All over the world states grant immunity to their representatives.
‘In February 2001, the US government intervened in the case filing a ‘suggestion of immunity’ on behalf of President Mugabe and Foreign Minister Mudenge. The government asserted that Mugabe and Mudenge were entitled toabsolute immunity from jurisdiction under the customary international law doctrine of head of state immunity. The case against Jiang Zemin, then president of the People’s Republic of China, followed a very similar fact pattern to Mugabe.
The Mugabe and Zemin cases address the concept of immunity very well. Recently, Yemen’sparliament has approved that President Ali Abdullah Saleh holds complete immunity from prosecution.
Now let’s have a look at the presidential immunity granted by the constitutions of different countries: According to article 11 of the constitution of Iceland the president is not accountable and cannot be prosecuted without parliament’s consent.
According to the Italian constitution, the president of the Italian Republic is not accountable, and he is not responsible for any act of his office, unless he has committed high treason or attempted to subvert the constitution.
Section 308 of the Nigerian constitution of 1999 provides immunity from court proceedings, i.e., proceedings that will compel their attendance in favour of elected executive officers, namely the president and his vice and governors of states and deputies.
This immunity extends to actsdone in their official capacities so that they are not responsible for acts done on behalf of the state.
By the constitution of Sri Lanka, the president of Sri Lanka has sovereign immunity.
Article 361 of the constitution of India states that the president, or the governor or rajpramukh of a state, shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties.
This should be now clear to people who have immunity phobia and are biased in their opinions that the presidential post has complete immunity everywhere, either it is Pakistan or other countries. They should also note that this immunity is not for Mr Zardari or anyone else, rather relates to the post of the president of Pakistan, whosoever holds it.
HAFIZ MUHAMMAD IRFAN Islamabad