Immunity in Switzerland procedure, MUST READ it plz.

Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA)
Bundeshaus West
CH-3003 Bern
Tel. +41 (0)31 322 21 11
Fax +41 (0)31 324 90 47   

Link http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/topics/intorg/chres/imdig.html

 

Immunity of holders of political office and of states:

 To enable them to exercise their office unhindered, heads of state enjoy full immunity against legal proceedings abroad. Heads of government and foreign ministers can also claim immunity when travelling abroad. In certain circumstances, this also applies to other members of government in the exercise of their duties.

 

Besides the personal immunity of officeholders, states and their property also enjoy immunity.

 

Immunity of holders of political office

 

While abroad, serving heads of state enjoy absolute immunity against criminal proceedings in all actions that otherwise would have been subject to the jurisdiction of these states. The immunity of heads of state is a principle embodied in customary international law.

 

According to the Federal Supreme Court, immunity is weakened in the following two cases:
When a state expressly waives the immunity of its head of state, the head of state cannot invoke immunity.
When a head of state leaves office, immunity no longer holds. A former head of state can claim immunity at most for actions undertaken in the exercise of official functions. If such a connection does not exist, the former head of state can be legally prosecuted.

 

Decision of the Federal Supreme Court in the Marcos case (115 Ib 496, p. 500) (fr)
 Heads of state have no immunity in the case of war crimes. The statutes of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunals for for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda make provision for the fact that a defendant's official position for qualified war crimes, e.g. as head of state, does not relieve such person of criminal responsibility.
The case of Augusto Pinochet, the former Chilean dictator, revived the debate over the criminal responsibility of former heads of state for qualified crimes committed while in office. General Pinochet was held not to be immune from arrest for alleged acts of torture.

 

In contrast to criminal proceedings, there is less agreement on the immunity of heads of state with respect to offences under civil law. One body of legal doctrine holds that both the official actions and the private actions of heads of state enjoy immunity from civil law proceedings. Another body takes the view that immunity extends only to official, and not private, actions.
Immunity of states and their property

 

In Europe, the European Convention on State Immunity of 16 May 1972 regulates protection of the property of foreign states. Non-member states of the Council of Europe may also accede to this convention. Very few states have ratified the convention. In Switzerland, the convention entered into force on 7 October 1982.

 

On 2 December 2004, the General Assembly of the United Nations (UNO) adopted a universal convention on the jurisdictional immunities of states and their property. Switzerland will sign this convention.

 

Switzerland does not have a law that regulates the application of the immunity of states under international law. In accordance with the Federal Supreme Court, under certain conditions a foreign state can be summoned before a Swiss court. A distinction must be drawn between
whether the foreign state acted in the exercise of sovereign authority (sovereign act or act of state, "acta iure imperii") or
whether it acted as a subject of private law equal to a private person (legal transactions, "acta iure gestionis").

 

Only in the first case can the state claim jurisdictional immunity. In the second case, by contrast, the state can be summoned before a Swiss court, but only on condition that there is a connection between the civil legal relationship and Swiss territory.

 

According to the Federal Supreme Court, Switzerland can also impose sanctions on the foreign state. What holds for jurisdictional immunity also holds in principle for immunity from measures of constraint: Measures of constraint may not be taken against assets and property intended for the performance of public functions.

 

A state can expressly waive its immunity from jurisdiction and constraint. Such a waiver can take place in various ways, either before a dispute materializes or ad hoc in a lawsuit.

 

Since 1918, the Federal Supreme Court has followed a restrictive line on the immunity of states.

Zardar Report by corruption International Centre for Asset Recovery

Source : http://www.assetrecovery.org/kc/node/2200e2b6-444c-11de-9627-1d322f879051.0;jsessionid=3FE32A47D0A09935AB08390E11EA882D

 

Chronology:

1988: Benazir Bhutto elected Prime Minister of Pakistan, the first woman to lead a Muslim country.

 

1990: Bhutto was dismissed by President Khan on allegations of corruption and misrule.

 

1993: Bhutto became Prime Minister for a second time.

 

1996, July: Bhutto appointed Asif Ali Zardari as Minister of Investment.

 

1996, November 5: Bhutto dismissed for the second time by President Laghari on allegations of gross corruption and misrule.

 

Corruption Allegations

Among them are the appointment of 26,000 party supporters to state jobs and state-owned banks during Bhutto's term as Prime Minister, unsecured government loans to 50 large projects  through which Bhutto and Zardari benefitted by having loans given to frontmen. In total, Zardari received £10 million in investment funds in three new sugar mills. Zardari received a kickback amounting to 40 million rupee on a contract involvng the Pakistan Steel Mill. 1

 

1994: Bhutto influenced the award the preshipment verification contract to a Swiss corporation Société Générale de-Surveillance (SGS) and its then subsidiary Cotecna in return for consultancy fees (kickbacks) of 6 percent and 3 percent to two Bhutto and Zardari controlled companies in British Virgin Island (BVI) under the names Bomer Finances Inc and Nassam Overseas Inc. Money paid to Swiss bank accounts linked to these companies amounted to $12 million. In the same year, it is also alleged that a commission of 7 percent was paid on importation of $83 million worth of tractors from Poland. Zardari's Caribbean company, Dargal Associated received this payment, which was confirmed by Ursus Tractors of Poland. 2

 

1994: Zardari received bribes amounting to $10 million through a shell company Capricorn Trading from a businessman Razzak Yaqub trading under the name A.R.Y. International Exchange in exchange for an exclusive import license of gold into Pakistan. Yaqub shipped more than $ 500 million in gold to Pakistan over a period of three years, while Zardari benefitted through bribes paid into the Dubai and Swiss Citibank accounts, which were opened with the assistance of the Swiss lawyer Jens Schlegelmilch. In total Zardari received over $ 40 million. 3

 

1996: Bhutto and Zardari allegedly demanded a 5 percent 'remuneration' in $ 4 billion contract involving purchase of fighter jets, in which three French companies were involved, namely: Dassault Aviation, Snecma, and Thomson-CSF. The 5 percent was to be paid to Marleton Business S.A., one of Zardari's British Virgin Island companies. The deal collapsed when Bhutto was deposed. 4

 

1997, October: Swiss government began a probe into Swiss involvement in Bhutto's corrupt SGS/Cotecna deal, and moved to freeze $ 13.7mil USD in Swiss bank accounts owned by Bhutto, Zardari, and family. In August of 1998, a Swiss Magistrate wrote an opinion urging Pakistani authorities to indict Bhutto themselves using evidence gathered in Switzerland. In April of 1999, an Accountability Court in Lahore sentenced Bhutto and Zardari on corruption charges to five years in jail, $8.6mil USD in fines, and disqualified Bhutto from politics for twenty-one years.

 

Bhutto appealed this conviction to the Pakistani Supreme Court, which reversed the lower court ruling and remanded the case back to a different Accountability Court, deeming the initial sentence, "politically motivated."

 

2003: In Switzerland an investigating magistrate judge found both Bhutto and Zardari guilty of aggravated money laundering in connection to the SGS/Cotecna probe. Bhutto's attorneys appealed and had this conviction overturned on procedural grounds, because the investigating magistrate had not conducted a hearing in determining this verdict. Additional charges were raised by another Swiss magistrate in July of 2004, thereby reopening the case.

 

2003: The Swiss magistrate found that during her second term as Prime Minister Bhutto enriched herself and her husband with kickbacks from a government contract with two Swiss companies. 5

 

2007, October: President Musharaff granted blanket immunity for past corrupt actions, shielding many public officials and members of the government from prosecution. This applied to Bhutto and Zardari, though not to political opponent Nawar Sharif. Bhutto returned to Pakistan and subsequently re-entered into Pakistani politics.

 

A Lahore High Court chose to reserve judgment on the initial SGS/Cotecna case that had been remanded from the Supreme Court, fearing another Bhutto appeal on the grounds of political bias.

 

2007, December: Following the assassination of Bhutto's in December of 2007, both the Pakistani and Swiss charges relating to the SGS/Cotecna case were dropped. Probes into Zardari's actions in relation to this case are still ongoing. Altogether, it is believed that the government of Pakistan lost over US $ 2 billion in potential revenues because of Bhutto's corruption.

 

 
Notes
Raymond W. Baker (2005) Capitalism's Achilles Heel, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Raymond W. Baker (2005) Capitalism's Achilles Heel, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. page 79
Raymond W. Baker (2005) Capitalism's Achilles Heel, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Raymond W. Baker (2005) Capitalism's Achilles Heel.
Dean Nelson and Ghulam Hasnain, 'Corruption amnesty may release millions for Bhutto', The Sunday Times, 14 October 2007, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2652808.ece

Chahne Waloon Sye Maazrat Kye Saath

 

Yousuf Raza another corruption

سرکاری ٹی وی کے مینیجنگ ڈائریکٹر یوسف مرزا بیگ کا حیران کن تقرر نامہ
Thursday, January 12, 2012, 12:20 Pakistan

 

مملکت پاکستان کرپشن اور مال حرام برائے نااہل ترین نان پروفیشنل خواتین و حضرات کی خدمت گزاری کے لئے جنت گناہ اور فردوس ہڈ حرام بن چکی ہے، اس خبر کے ساتھ وہ ملازمتی کنکریکٹ بعض حکومت پاکستان کا تقرر نامہ بنام یوسف مرزا بیگ دیا جا رہا ہے جنہیں سرکاری پاکستان ٹیلی ویژن کا منیجنگ ڈائریکٹر کی حیثیت سے فائز کیا گیا ہے، ہر حوالہ سے یہ تقرر نامہ اور اس کے جملہ مندرجات حیران کن ہیں، ناقابل یقین، ناقابل فہم ہیں، سمجھ سے بالاتر ہے کہ پی ٹی وی کا منیجنگ ڈائریکٹر کون سے سرخاب کے پر رکھنے والا ہے جسے اس قسم کی کرپٹ مراعات عطا فرمائی گئی ہیں، سمجھ سے بالاتر ہے کہ ایم ڈی کیوں اور کیسے ایڈورٹائزنگ رونینو میں 3 فیصد کا مالک قرار دیا جا سکتا ہے، نہیں معلوم کہ پھر کیوں پی ٹی وی میں ایڈورٹائزنگ اسٹاف کو بھاری تنخواہوں میں رکھا گیا ہے، بھارتی ٹی وی چینل زی ٹی وی کے شعبہ اشتہارات کے یوسف مرزا بیگ کی کہانی مختصر ہے، نواز شریف نے انہیں پی ٹی وی کا منیجنگ ڈائریکٹر صرف اس لئے مقرر کیا تھا کہ وہ ان کی اہلیہ کے رشتہ دار تھے۔ یوسف مرزا کے پاس پاکستان میں کام کرنے کا کوئی تجربہ نہ تھا، جب فوج نے نواز شریف کا تختہ پلٹا تو یوسف مرزا نے فی الفور پرویز مشرف کے ہاتھ پر بیعت کر لی، بعدازاں نجی ٹی وی چینل دنیا ٹی وی کی خاتون اینکر کو ہراساں کرکے لازوال شہرت کمائی۔ جمپ مار کر پی ٹی وی کے ایم ڈی مقرر ہوگئے، اس کیریئر گراف سے یہ جھلک حاصل کی جا سکتی ہے کہ وہ ہمہ جہتی طبیعت کے حامل شخص ہیں اور وقت کا خوشامدانہ ساتھ دینے کا وصف رکھتے ہیں۔ ملازمت کا معاہدہ خود پڑھیں اور اللہ کو حاضر و ناظر جان کر خود سمجھیں کہ قائداعظم کے پاکستان میں کس قسم کا کھیل کھیلا جا رہا ہے، اللہ کیونکر رکھے قدم قدم آباد، اس سوہنی دھرتی کو۔

Fraud in Peoples Party Beroozgar Rickshaw Scheme

 

Pakistani Gilrs student facing Blackmailing from USA....

پاکستانی طالبات کو بلیک میلنگ کا خطرہ

by Izhar Ullah on 9 hours ago // 2 Comments

31

اسلام آباد : پاکستان کے دارالحکومت اسلام آباد میں امریکی سفارت خانے کے زیر اہتمام نومبر 2011ء کی آخری تاریخ کو ایک ڈانس پارٹی  منعقد کی گئی تھی جس میں شریک مقامی طالبات کو بلیک میلنگ کے خدشات لاحق ہیں۔

"کچھ خاص "کے نام سے ہونے والی اس ڈانس پارٹی کی کچھ تفصیلات اب سامنے آرہی ہیں جس میں ایسی طالبات جو اس پارٹی میں شریک ہوئی تھیں انہوں نے شکایت ہے کہ پارٹی میں انہیں یہ کہہ کر بلایا گیا تھا کہ صرف پاکستانی روایتی ڈانس کے مناظر دکھائے جائیں گے اور پھر امریکی یونیورسٹیوں میں داخلے کی معلومات دی جائیں گی۔

تقریب کے بعد بات کرتے ہوئے امریکی اہل کار کا کہنا تھا کہ اس کلچرل پروگرام میں صرف طلبہ و طالبات کو مدعو کیا گیا تھا ، امریکی سفارتخانے کا کہنا تھا کہ امریکی سفارتخانہ پاکستانی عوام کے ساتھ شراکت داری چاہتا ہے اسی لئے ڈانس پارٹی کا انعقاد کیا گیا تھا۔

ان طالبات کو بتایا گیا تھا کہ اس پارٹی میں شرکت سے ان کے امریکی تعلیمی اسکالر شپ کے حصول کے لیے راستےکھل جائیں گے، اس لیے پاکستانی یونیورسٹیز کے کافی طلبہ نے پارٹی میں شرکت کے لئے فارم جمع کرائے۔،ڈانس پارٹی میں پاکستان بھر سے  یونیورسٹیز کےطلبہ و طالبات کو منتخب کر کے بلایا گیا تھا۔

اس پارٹی میں شریک ہونے والے ایک طالب علم کاکہنا تھا طلبہ کو  جوس کے نام پر دھوکے سے شراب پلا دی گئی اور بہت سی پاکستانی طالبات جو صرف اس لیے اس ڈانس پارٹی میں شریک ہوگئی تھیں کہ انہیں امریکی یونیورسٹیوں میں داخلہ مل جائے گا، شراب پینے کے بعد مدہوش ہو کر انتہائی اخلاق سوز حرکات کا نشانہ بنیں۔

انہیں نشے میں مدہوش ہو کر ناچنے پر اکسایا جاتا رہا اور اس کی نا صرف پوری فلم بندی کی گئی بلکہ سیکڑوں تصاویر بھی اتاری گئیں۔ اب خدشہ اس بات کا ہے  کہ ان تصاویر کو کہیں ان طالبات و طلبہ کو بلیک میل کرنے کے لیے نہ استعمال کیا جائے۔

 یاد رہے کہ اس  ڈانس پارٹی میں شرکت کے لیے جو ڈانسر امریکا سےبلائے گئے تھے وہ بعد میں اسلام آباد میں جاسوسی کرتے گرفتار ہوئے۔

 یکم دسمبر 2011 کوراولپنڈی کے علاقے کچہری چوک کے قریب سے پولیس نے جی ایچ کیو سمیت دیگر حساس عمارتوں کی فوٹیج بناتے ہوئے 10 امریکی  عورتوں اور مردوں کو رنگے ہاتھوں پکڑ لیا تھا اور پھر پوچھ گچھ کے بعد تمام وڈیو فوٹیج ضائع کرنے کے بعد رہا کر دیا گیا۔

مذکورہ متنازعہ تقریب کے حوالے سے امریکی سفارت خانے کی جانب سے کوئی باضابطہ موقف سامنے نہیں آیا ہے۔

 

2 New frauds of our Govt.