Knowing it would get us nowhere, we still have to talk about her for sometime. In this period, we may utter or hear the word that pleases our ears than determine the truth.
 
Her heirs have finally decided to seek help from United Nations because this nation is least united. Besides, the local caretakers were rather careless in this case. They instantly proclaimed the cause of her death without attending the root cause of antagonism. Then they had second thoughts about their established truth and opted to call Scotland Yard.
 
The other day, we had a dissimilar attack at the gate of Lahore High Court. But the Scotland Yard was not bothered because we had no puzzle and victims were not VIPs. In this war, we are fully reconciled to a suicide attacker who can kill dozens of cops or soldiers without pulling a trigger. All that the State and the people are required to do is to count the dead and the injured or assemble their remains as far as practical.      
 
By now we are literally following a drill much like the fire-brigade. We leave the spot as soon as we put down the flames.  
 
Now let us determine how do we proceed with Benazir Bhutto? But first let's make out as to what do we really seek out of this target killing? You can feel the tug of war between her heirs and the careless but adamant administration. Both want to dribble the ball in the opposite direction but her heirs believe only the UN can possibly snatch the game.  
 
By the idiom, we may call it an assassination but only as long as we don't point a finger at the killer. Once you accuse the hand behind, you have to call it a murder than an assassination. Some brains in her party are now beginning to draw a line between the physical cause of death and the conspiracy behind the killing. They are least interested in the medico-legal case for they ought to initiate a politico-legal prosecution preferably outside the court. President Musharraf, however, has softly brushed aside the 48-hour deadline announced in Naudero and is unwilling to cite any reason for declining the needful. And he is the President.
 
Now, what do you prefer? But who the hell are you to decide? You and I are born to hear than speak. Once in five years, you can stamp a ballot and in disgust may even spoil your vote. What else can you do unless you have the money to be a candidate and buy the bullet-proof vehicles preferably without a sunroof?
 
This nation can't hold a referendum whether to call the United Nations or call off the investigation by the Scotland Yard. You can't say 'No' to UN when you invite foreign expertise to back your own investigators. But as the President of Pakistan you may do any thing. To have a freehand to act, the only thing one needs to forget is one's oath as the President.
 
Now as a supporter of the slain leader, you obviously won't tolerate any criticism of the suggestion to invite UN because the Party has given the rationale for involving the body. Yet taking advantage of your disinterest in the Scotland Yard detectives, may I seek your attention to the following Constitutional and legal questions:
        
 
i.Whether the Federation or any Province can engage any foreign agency to investigate a murder in any part of Pakistan ?
 
ii.Whether any Session Court can initiate any proceedings in a murder case on the findings of a foreign agency?
 
iii.Whether the Federation can take any executive action in a province without bothering its consent or formally shifting the constitutional function to the Federation under Article 147?
 
All those questions are now before the Supreme Court. Note worthy is the fact that the killing occurred near Rawalpindi's Liaqat Bagh and constitutionally the responsibility of the criminal investigation lies upon the Punjab Province which did not entrust any of its functions to the Federation under Article 147 or made any formal request to involve foreigners. With both the Federation and Punjab being ruled by care-taker cabinets any decision of the Provincial Government does not necessarily reflect the will of the majority of people of Punjab.
 
The apex Court is reminded that Britain is an ally in the so-called "war against terror" which is a supra constitutional military activity since Pakistan has not formally declared war under the relevant provisions of the Constitution. Britain as a member of North Atlantic Treaty Organization has sizeable military presence in neighbouring Afghanistan where British military officers have been accusing Pakistani tribesmen of infiltration. Thus the British investigators are mostly likely to endorse the Federation's accusations and prejudice the process of law inside Punjab.
 
The Constitution as well as the law, i.e.; the Code of Criminal Procedure does not entitle the Federation to engage a foreign agency and give her access to facts which can breach the Security of Pakistan. How can information being concealed from the people of Pakistan be shared with foreign experts who are not under any oath to keep them a secret? This would be a clear cut breach of the Official Secrets Act and neither the Prime Minister nor any other Minister is permitted by the Constitution to "directly or indirectly communicate or reveal to any person any matter" which shall be brought under his consideration.
 
While every Province has its Crimes Branch Police the Federation, too, maintains a full fledged Federal Investigation Agency at the cost of the tax payers. How come it simply forgot about its own instruments? Unless immediately interrupted by the Supreme Court, the investigation under challenge is likely to corrode the public confidence in the capacity of the four Provinces to investigate and penalize crimes. The thoughtless move to console a political party can undermine the integrity of Pakistan.
 
Even under a care-taker Cabinet, every Province and the Federation shall be governed strictly in accordance with the Constitution.   By the Constitution the Federal and the Provincial Cabinets are collectively responsible to the respective assemblies. This hour, however, the National Assembly and the Punjab Assembly stand dissolved and thus it is for the Supreme Court to determine the responsibility for the violation of the Constitution both in the Federation and the concerned Province.
 
Article 97 has clearly laid down the "Extent of executive authority of Federation" and it states as under:
 
"97. Subject to the Constitution, the executive authority of the Federation shall extend to the matters with respect to which Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) has power to make laws, including exercise of rights, authority and jurisdiction in and in relation to areas outside Pakistan:
 
      Provided that the said authority shall not, save as expressly provided in the Constitution or in any law made by Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), extend in any Province to a matter with respect to which the Proincial Assembly has also power to make laws."   
 
Now the Punjab Assembly is duly empowered by the Concurrent List to do any legislation for Criminal law and Criminal procedure as elaborated by the first two Entries of the Concurrent List and there is no provision in the Constitution or in any law which "expressly" provides to extend the Federal Executive Authority in Punjab for either Criminal law or Criminal Procedure.
 
As far provincial autonomy, attention may be drawn to Entry No. 40 of the Federal Legislative List which reads as under:
 
"40. Extension of the powers and jurisdiction of members of a police force belonging to any Province to any area in another Province, but not so as to enable the police of one Province to exercise powers and jurisdiction in another Province without the consent of the Government of that Province; extension of the powers and jurisdiction of members of a police force belonging to any Province to railway areas outside that Province"
 
The question arises whether the Parliament can do any legislation to transfer the powers and jurisdiction of the members of a police force of any Province to any agency outside Pakistan?
 
The petition questions an act against the sovereignty of Pakistan which is the first consideration for every citizen particularly those taking an oath under the Constitution. The defense of the sovereignty of Pakistan is the duty of the President and after him that of the Chief Justice of Pakistan.