Musharraf is in the hot seat but will he be prosecuted?

An Islamabad session court judge has directed police officials to file an FIR (First Information Report - meaning registering a criminal case against someone) against former President Gen (R) Pervez Musharraf for detaining seven of the superior court judges and their families in their houses after proclaiming emergency on Nov 3, 2007.

The seven judges including the Chief Justice had passed a verdict against the emergency and instructed all judges not to take fresh oath from the General.

According to DAWN, the case had not been registered till late in the evening, but a senior police officer told the paper that it would ‘definitely be done within a few hours’.

Sources told the newspaper that an emergency meeting was called in the interior ministry, which was attended by senior officers of the interior and law ministries and officers of police and their legal branch. Details of the meeting remain unknown but it is yet another bushfire the ousted General now faces in a span of less than a month.

On July 31 the Supreme Court ruled against his emergency of Nov 3, 2007 making all steps taken by him thereafter illegal and unconstitutional. In the absence of his indemnity by the previous parliament or from the existing parliament, defending his emergency acts is a steep hill to climb for the ex-general.

In the presence of a strong independent media now (ironically it was him to created it), a strong and popular public support for his nemesis Nawaz Sharif and a somewhat a neutral army chief of staff, it is likely that Musharraf may be forced to have his day in court. What transpires is any body's guess.

Some observers strongly feel that the military won't let its ex-chief go through the humiliation. A similar attempt of army humiliation by then PM Nawaz Sharif in 1999 had triggered a mutiny by a catorie of Generals led by Gen Mehmood, Gen Usmani et al culminating in a coup that overthrew the civilian strongman and brought Gen Musharraf into power on October 12, 1999.

Chief of Army Staff Musharraf had been ordered retired while he was on his way back from Sri Lanka and replaced by Sharif's handpicked Gen Zia uddin - then ISI chief and reportedly a relative. The Generals did not like it and rebelled against Musharraf''s replacement. The Triple One Brigade did the rest.

Sources told Dawn that a case would be registered against the former president under section 344 of the Pakistan Penal Code which says:

‘Whoever wrongfully confines any person for ten days or more, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term, which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.’

If security czar Rehman Malik is to believed, an extradition treaty is in the works between UK and the Pakistan government which, if implemented soon, may force the British government to force Gen (R) Musharraf go back to Pakistan and face the criminal charges.

If the agreement is "delayed for some reasons" or there is deliberate foot-dragging, legally then it won't be easy to make the retired General come back and face the charges but the British government may find it politically incorrect to let Musharraf continue to stay put in UK. He may then be nudged to cross the Atlantic or take up the Saudi offer for a well-cushioned self-exile in the kingdom.

The court order against the ex-President was passed by additional District and Sessions judge Mohammad Akmal Khan in response to petitions filed by advocate Aslam Ghuman about five months ago.

The judge in his short order observed that the respondent (Mr Musharraf) was liable to be tried under various legal and criminal provisions.

The court has already adjourned the case for twelve times in a span of five months and further adjournment over the issue was denied, he added.

The plaintiff requested the court to direct Islamabad police to register the case against the ex-President after the office of Senior Superintendent of Police did not record his complaint. Then the judge ordered the additional station house officer (SHO) of the secretariat police station (who was present in court) to register a case against the former president.

The plaintiff's petition says that Gen (R) Musharraf illegally imposed Provisional Constitution Order on Nov 3, 2007, and detained Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and 60 other judges of superior judiciary along with their families after they had refused to take oath under the PCO.

The petition seeks the trial of Musharraf and others who played a role in implementing the PCO.

A large number of former and present parliamentarians, bureaucrats and police officials were also likely to be named in the case, sources told Dawn.

Supreme Court declares Nov 3 steps unconstitutional

The Supreme Court of Pakistan Friday declared the steps taken on November 3, 2007 by former president Gen (R) Pervez Musharraf unconstitutional thereby opening doors for potential case of treason against him.

Charges of treason can only be brought against him by the parliament. The Chief Justice yesterday clarified this issue stating such matters are upto the parliament to take up and not the judiciary.

Musharraf, who came to power in a coup in 1999, quit as president almost a year ago to avoid impeachment and has been living in London for the past two months.

Some argue that holding Musharraf accountable would deter military strongmen from trying to seize power in the future and give a chance for democratic institutions to grow in a country that has spent about half its existence under army rule.

The flip side is that pursuing Musharraf could shake the political establishment and reopen old wounds at a time when Pakistan faces huge tasks in battling Taliban insurgents and reviving its economy.

The judgment came after the 14-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry completed the hearing of constitutional petitions regarding PCO judges, appointments of judges of higher judiciary and November 3, 2007 steps.

The Supreme Court in its short verdict declared the steps of November 3, 2007 taken by former president Pervez Musharraf as unconstitutional. Article 279 of the Constitution was violated on November 3, 2007, it said.

It termed as illegal and unconstitutional the sacking of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and the other higher judiciary as well as the appointment of Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar as chief justice.

The oath taken by President Asif Ali Zardari will not be affected by the SC verdict, it said.

All the appointments made in the higher judiciary of Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar have been termed illegal.

It termed as unconstitutional all the appointments of judges during November 3, 2007 to March 24, 2008.

It said the number of Supreme Court judges will continue to remain 16.

It declared unconstitutional all the steps taken by Pervez Musharraf during November 3, 2007 to December 15, 2007 including the increasing of number of superior judges through finance bill.Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry announced the verdict.

The verdict said all the appointments of judges on and after November 3, 2007 under PCO were unconstitutional.

The case of PCO judges will be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council, it said.

The announcement of today’s verdict sent a wave of jubilation outside the Supreme Court and at all the bar associations countrywide.

Sweets were distributed as people and lawyers chanted slogans hailing the decision and in support of the judiciary.

The 14-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry reserved the judgment after completing the hearing of the case and announced it after a delay of over four and a half hours.

Musharraf summoned by Supreme Court over PCO judges’ case

JULY 22 - The Supreme Court on Wednesday has summoned former President Pervez Musharraf to explain his decision to impose emergency and firing of the judges in 2007.

The court notice allows Musharraf to send a lawyer in his place.

Attorney General Sardar Latif Khosa confirmed the court order. He said the federal government would not defend the actions taken by Musharraf on Nov. 3, 2007, when faced with growing challenges to his rule, he declared a state of emergency, suspended the constitution and dismissed the judges.

Musharraf is currently staying in London with his family and is in touch with attorneys Mian Sharifuddin Pirzada and Malik Qayyum in this matter.

The next hearing in the case is on July 29 and it is expected that Musharraf's attorney(s) will represent him in the hearing.

Wasi Zafar, a law minister during Musharraf's rule, said after the announcement, that the retired general could appear before the Supreme Court either through his lawyer or in person."If he does not do it, the court can initiate proceedings against him in his absence," he said.

The former army chief seized power in a 1999 military coup. In early 2007, Musharraf dismissed the Supreme Court's chief justice, Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry. That triggered mass protests led by lawyers that damaged Musharraf's popularity.

Meanwhile, US special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke who is in Islamabad today said told reporters that President Pervez Musharraf is now history and that the US will not come to defend him, AP reported today..

Talking to media in the capital, Holbrooke termed Pervez Musharraf’s case as Pakistan’s internal issue and added that the US respects Pakistan’s judiciary and free press.

Former Attorney General Malik Mohammad Qayyum said on Wednesday that he was ready to defend former president Gen (retd.) Pervez Musharraf at the Supreme Court if he was asked to do so. He was talking to reporters at the Supreme Court premises soon after the issuance of notice to Musharraf.

Qayyum termed the decision of the apex court highly appreciable and according to the law and the Constitution.He said that the Supreme Court had taken a good step to give a chance to Pervez Musharraf to explain his position about the imposition of emergency in the country.

To a question, Qayyum said that there was no need for Musharraf to appear in person, adding that only his counsel should appear in the case. If he was asked he would definitely appear in the case and defend the former president, Qayyum said.