Judicial overreach: Musharraf ban

Published May 3, 2013
Former President Pervez Musharraf. — File Photo
Former President Pervez Musharraf. — File Photo

BANNED for life — Pervez Musharraf’s abortive return to politics has been brought to a screeching halt by the Peshawar High Court order on Tuesday. Parsing the logic of the order is delicate business: Musharraf has clearly committed grave crimes against the Constitution and the superior judiciary was a direct target of Gen Musharraf in 2007. But there are two other, relevant matters here: one, the issue before the PHC chief justice was simply the former general’s disqualification from contesting a National Assembly seat in Chitral; and two, Gen Musharraf has yet to be convicted in any of the numerous cases, and countless allegations, lodged against him. So in many ways, the high court has put the judicial cart before the horse — an unhappy situation of judicial overreach where perhaps none was necessary.

For Gen Musharraf, the tightening of the judicial noose means he has largely run out of options, at least public, legal ones. All legal routes ultimately lead to the Supreme Court — and no one need be reminded who and what awaits him there. The issue, however, is larger than a former dictator and a superior judiciary unwilling to extend to him the legal proprieties a less controversial accused may expect. As much as there is a legal side to how best the case of Gen Musharraf ought to be dealt with, there is a political side too — ultimately, the decision to prosecute the former dictator and keep him out of politics ought to be one taken by the people’s representatives. Where the elected representatives have not moved as quickly or efficiently as the courts would have liked, the superior judiciary has tried to produce ad hoc solutions. But in the case of Gen Musharraf, the judiciary itself has much to account for given that his 1999 coup was sanctioned by the Supreme Court and that the referendum which allowed the then-army chief to stay on in power beyond the initial three years granted to him by the court also occurred with minimal judicial interference or objection.

Perhaps what the country needs most — and Gen Musharraf’s determination to return to Pakistan has created an opportunity for — is a meaningful and wide-ranging revisiting of Article 6 of the Constitution and the 1973 law operationalising the punishment for treason, a job a strong parliament after May 11 could undertake. More specifically, treating enablers and aiders and abettors at the same level as the general taking over in a coup, could perhaps help make it more difficult for a would-be coup-maker.

Opinion

Editorial

Judiciary’s SOS
Updated 28 Mar, 2024

Judiciary’s SOS

The ball is now in CJP Isa’s court, and he will feel pressure to take action.
Data protection
28 Mar, 2024

Data protection

WHAT do we want? Data protection laws. When do we want them? Immediately. Without delay, if we are to prevent ...
Selling humans
28 Mar, 2024

Selling humans

HUMAN traders feed off economic distress; they peddle promises of a better life to the impoverished who, mired in...
New terror wave
Updated 27 Mar, 2024

New terror wave

The time has come for decisive government action against militancy.
Development costs
27 Mar, 2024

Development costs

A HEFTY escalation of 30pc in the cost of ongoing federal development schemes is one of the many decisions where the...
Aitchison controversy
Updated 27 Mar, 2024

Aitchison controversy

It is hoped that higher authorities realise that politics and nepotism have no place in schools.