LAHORE, July 25: A petition of the Pakistan Lawyers Forum against the appointment of Gen Pervez Musharraf as president was not taken up by the Lahore High Court on Friday, as the senior member of division bench was on leave.

Justice Tassadaq Hussain Jilani, heading the bench, was not able to attend the court due to the death of his mother-in-law, and the petition was sent back to the LHC office to be placed before the court on the next date of hearing.

Through this petition, PLF president A.K. Dogar requested the court to ask Gen Musharraf to explain under which law he had assumed the office of president while being in the military uniform. The LHC had already dismissed another petition of the PLF last month, which sought Gen Musharraf’s trial on high treason charges for making a show of force by saying in public that he would remain in uniform till the date of his own choice.

In the current petition, claimed to have been filed in public interest, Mr Dogar had further prayed that the court should restrain Gen Musharraf from functioning as president till the disposal of petition.

The petition was based on argument that even if the Legal Framework Order was assumed to be a part of the 1973 constitution, Gen Musharraf could not hold the offices of president and COAS simultaneously. According to the petitioner, the president’s authority could be questioned by a court of law through a writ for quo-warranto under Article 199 of the constitution. The president should be asked to disclose the source of his authority for assuming the office, the petitioner maintained.

According to the petitioner, under Article 243 of the 1973 constitution, the federal government shall have the control and command of armed forces. In the current democratic setup, the prime minister was the supreme commander. A government elected under the constitution could only perform its functions and ensure compliance with the constitutional provisions by making civilian powers superior to those of the armed forces in peace and war rather than bringing the civilian powers under the direct control of army, he maintained.

He had further alleged in the petition that Article 41(7) empowered Gen Musharraf to hold the office of president for five years without being elected. This Article was in clear conflict with Article 2(A) of the Constitution which declared the Holy Quran and Sunnat as prime sources of legislation and made it clear that powers of the state would be exercised only through chosen representatives of the people.