The Musharraf Case Nasim Zehra In March 2013 former general Parvez Musharraf landed in Karachi with the mistaken notion that a bright political future awaited him. Many forewarned him. On the eve of his departure from Dubai, UAE’s Foreign Minister’s special envoy dissuaded him from leaving. Mian Nawaz Sharif had conveyed to Musharraf through a common UAE friend once in Pakistan, he would be tried. Army chief general Parvez Kayani also unsuccessfully tried dissuading him. Musharraf’s arrival proved every bit the nightmare all had dreaded. Politically more aware Pakistan was not benign towards a former military ruler; accused in the Akbar Bugti killing, suspect in Benazir assassination, hounded for Lal Masjid etc. Simultaneously proliferating dialogue platforms prompted questioning beyond Constitutional parameters: aren’t Musharraf’s colleagues in the PPP and now in PML-N cabinet; why overlook Musharraf’s original sin of October 1999 coup; government seeks dialogue with killers of 50,000 yet trial for Musharraf. Army too became restive claiming the trial now humiliated and threatened its former commander. Compounding fault-lines. Although unlike previous military rulers Musharraf was charge-sheeted under article 6, appeared in Court and kept under house arrest, he was treated with kid gloves. While political leaders with lesser crimes were jailed, treated as criminals and even hanged, the GHQ eventually appropriated Musharraf and kept him under its protection in the AFIC. The army has since sought a road-map for Musharraf’s exit, as have PML-N pragmatists like Shahbaz Sharif and Chaudary Nisar. Unsurprisingly disagreement between PML-N’s pragmatists and political activists has persisted even over trying Musharraf. Echoing government’s earlier decision Information Minister Parvez Rashid had said in my program that “if the government has to chose between stopping a dog stealing the milk or preventing our child from drowning, it would save the child.” He had been asked about the government’s response to the lawyers’ petition filed in the Supreme Court that the government be asked to file treason charges against the former military ruler under article 6. The Minister was clear that we would “politely” state our priorities to the Supreme Court i.e. to not get entangled with the treason case. But then government calculated that trying a former military ruler would boast its democratic credentials. The Special Court’s March 31st Order seems to have set the stage for Musharraf’s departure from Pakistan. After charge-sheeting Musharraf under article 6 and allowing him to speak in his own defence, Court was adjourned till April 14. Court order read as a sympathetic interpretation of law. Charged under article 6, Musharraf was a free man and the Court would also consider his plea for absence from subsequent hearings. On Musharraf’s request to visit his mother in Dubai, Order stated that removing Musharraf from the ECL was the government’s prerogative. Despite the Court Order Prime Minister refused to remove the former military ruler from the ECL in “public interest.” Why take the responsibility for what could politically backfire, must be the thinking within the PML-N activists. Let the Court ‘bell the cat’ they must argue, since Musharraf’s team is taking the case to higher courts. PML-N pragmatists too must realize that by allowing Musharraf to travel abroad on a higher court’s order would be politically risk-free for the government. It is unlikely that the government will block Musharrafs legal route to his travel abroad. His return too would then be the Courts responsibility. If Musharraf leaves on a one-way ticket, the government will have made no compromises in trying a military ruler to Court. Meanwhile in Pakistan’s political history March 31st will go down as a day when unprecedented accountability of a military ruler was initiated. Avoiding the anarchy and bloodshed of the horrifying Egyptian brand of what is paradoxically called the Arab Spring, accountability of a military ruler has been initiated in the precincts of a court. More importantly outside the Court the political verdict on the touchstone of democracy, has long declared the former general a loser.
Posted on: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 19:16:15 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015