On 31 July 2009, the Supreme court of Pakistan pronounced Pervez Musharraf’s declared emergency since November 2007 as “illegal and unconstitutional”. The court invoked Article 6 of the Pakistani constitution, which states that “any person abrogating or attempting to abrogate/suspend by use of force, or any other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason”. As the tenth President of Pakistan, Musharraf had sacked 15 Supreme Court judges, 56 of the provincial High Courts judges, and placed the then Chief Justice of Pakistan under House Arrest.
The case took off when the Nawaz Sharif government submitted multiple pages of complaints accusing Musharraf of high treason. Later on, a special court convened its first meeting at Federal Shariat Court and summoned Musharraf. However, Musharraf managed to escape summons by stating that he was suffering from heart disease. Finally, when he appeared before the court on 18 February 2014, he was not framed with any charges after avoiding twenty-four consecutive hearings. On 31 March 2014, Musharraf was indicted for treason. Musharraf had to be declared absconder after he had left the country for medical treatment by getting his name off the country’s ‘Exit Control List’ and failed to return after the permitted time outside the country.
On 17 December 2019, Musharraf was proven guilty of the charges against him and was sentenced to death. The Special Court had released a 169 pages detailed verdict signed by Chief Justice Waqar Ahmed Seth. The judgement against the former Army Chief was much against the chagrin of the Pakistani Army. Soon the judiciary of Pakistan was asked to review the judgement, and the death sentence of Musharraf was annulled with the support of political parties and compromised MNAs. It was yet another classic example of how the big names can play around with the justice system according to their whims and fancies.
The role played by the Pakistani military in ensuring the judgement is favorable to their ex-Chief is born out of loyalty that many in the military hierarchy owed to Musharraf. Major General Asif Ghafoor, director-general of the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the Pakistan Armed Forces media wing, remarked, “The verdict has been received with a lot of pain and anguish by rank and file of Pak Armed Forces”. The verdict was unambiguous in pronouncing the death in each of the multiple charges against Musharraf. The acromial relationship existing with the judiciary prompted the military top brass to hatch the plot to allow Musharraf to escape the nets of law and leave the country.
The verdict against Musharraf stands null and void. The hybrid government of Imran Khan is not pursuing the death sentence against Musharraf anymore. In fact, the special court formed particularly for trying the Musharraf case is being argued to be unconstitutional. It is being stated that there was no agenda for the bench of judges to be formed in the first place. However, the verdict was Pakistan’s first step towards democracy as it attempted to deter the military dictators from taking any unconstitutional step in the future. Pakistan’s judiciary has always been accused of being biased in favour of the army in the past as it has justified several coups in the name of “Doctrine of Necessity”. The judiciary has failed to question the higher officials for trashing the constitution and overthrowing the governments. This verdict was supposed to go down in the pages of the history of Pakistan and restore the trust of the common man in the judiciary. However, the caving in by the judiciary in declaring its judgement null and void shows how caged in it is. Neither it can uphold the constitution nor be seen to be citizen-centric.
The recent leak of data from Credit Suisse, an investment banking firm registered in Switzerland, implicated the ex-ISI chief, General Akhtar Abdur Rahman Khan. It has again brought the depth of greed and corruption that runs within the Pakistan Army, especially among its Generals. If the report is to be believed, General Pervez Musharraf is alleged to have built numerous fancy farmhouses, luxury apartments in the Middle East and London, and houses in Karachi and other Pakistani cities. The report has been critical of the Pakistan Army’s wretchedness though it paints itself as a knight in shining armour ready to sacrifice everything for the country’s sake. It is often said that the State of Pakistan does not have an army; the Pakistan Army has a State. The value of judgment has to be seen within this purview. Usurpation of the organs of the government and the use of undue force over the judiciary to tamper the country’s law system very much amounts to subversion of the constitution. But is the judiciary in Pakistan ready to bell the cat or happy in their cage?
Comments