Pakistan’s former military ruler,
General Pervez Musharraf has left for Dubai on Friday morning (March 18) to
ostensibly seek medical treatment for a “decade-old illness”, after the
interior ministry removed his name from the Exit Control List (ECL).
Musharraf’s departure all but brings to an end the saga of his treason trial
after nearly three years. On Wednesday (March 16), the Supreme Court (SC),
ordered the removal of Musharraf’s name from the ECL, but this did not preclude
the government from reinstating restrictions on the movement of the former
president. However, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan addressed a press
conference and informed that his ministry would follow through with the court’s
order after receiving assurances from Musharraf’s lawyers that he would
eventually return to Pakistan after seeking his required treatment to face his
charges. Many observers, however, view this assurance with skepticism and the
consensus view is that the treason trial has whimpered to a close.
Back in 2013, Pervez Musharraf
returned to Pakistan after a period of self-imposed exile in order to
participate and lead his nascent political party in the then-upcoming
elections. However, he was disqualified from standing in the elections;
moreover, in an unprecedented move in the country’s history, the former
dictator found himself facing arrest, after a warrant was issued by the
Islamabad High Court in April 2013, over charges of suspending the constitution,
dismissing judges and placing them under house arrest, and imposing an
emergency. In addition to these charges, he was also charged with the failure
to provide adequate security to former Prime Minister (PM) Benazir Bhutto, who
was assassinated in December 2007. After winning the May elections, a confident
PML-N’s federal government took the extraordinary step of bringing fiver
charges of high treason against the former dictator in a special court.
Predictions and assertions were made in December 2013 that the trial would be
speedily concluded. There was an unquestionable amount of hype around the
treason trial, as it was being touted as a historic occurrence that would
reshape the contours of democracy, redefine the civil-military relationship,
and set a positive precedent that would inhibit any future imposition of
martial law.
But putting a former dictator and
chief of the country’s most powerful institution on trial for treason was never
going to pan out the way the government desired. The investigation and trial of
Pervez Musharraf for imposing the 2007 Emergency was always underlined by
perceptions that this was a matter of personal vendetta for PM Nawaz Sharif,
whose government was overthrown in 1999 by the then Chief Of Army Staff. As a
result of this desire of the Sharifs to get back at the man who forced them
into exile, the proceedings exclusively targeted Musharraf, while no case was
built against any of his alleged co-conspirators. The choice of focusing on the
2007 emergency was also a curious one when the much graver original sin of the
1999 coup d’état made for a more logical case of treason. The 1999 coup, like
all previous coups, was ratified by the SC and hence there exists a dire need
to rectify this harmful precedent. Principles of justice and democracy demanded
that an example be set so that in the future overthrowing an elected government
and abrogating the constitution is not hailed as ‘saving the country’ but
treated like the treasonous act it is. But to avoid risking drudging up its own
past sins, the Nawaz government focused on the 2007 case due to its perceived
straightforwardness, thereby compromising the integrity of the proceedings. It
soon became clear however that the case was poorly and hastily prepared and
that Musharraf still enjoyed the support of his former institution. 
The trial played out farcically, as
the former president easily avoided appearing in court by pleading ill health
while the government and prosecutors manifestly lost their will to see the case
through when faced with the possibility of drawing the military’s ire.
The entire saga reeks of a missed
opportunity. Had the government’s prosecution covered all of its bases, perhaps
we could have witnessed a historic trial that would have done the unthinkable:
holding someone accountable in this country. The only kinds of accountability
drives we witness in Pakistan are politically motivated as they are lopsided
and transparently designed to fulfill vendettas against specific individuals and
political parties. Whether it is the case against Musharraf or the various
campaigns undertaken by the National Accountability Bureau, what is missing
from all of the above is a rational, transparent and objective methodology that
respects principles of justice.
Courtesy: Daily Times
No comments:
Post a Comment