Dear Readers,
Not too long ago, former President Pervez Musharraf was called ‘America’s most important ally in the war on terrorism’ by the Bush administration. Since then many things have changed and for Musharraf it has been downhill all the way after his return to Pakistan from self exile. By ignoring pleas and warnings by his friends and admirers to not come back, Musharraf has walked straight into allegations of treason among other things. Placed under arrest now in his farmhouse residence in Chak Shahzad which has been declared a sub-jail, he is also banned from leaving the country. It is obvious that bitter lessons have been learnt by allowing Husain Haqqani, Pakistan’s ex-Ambassador to the US to leave the country while he was being tried by the SC on different charges – the wily Haqqani never returned to Pakistan. The many allegations against Musharraf relate to his imposition of emergency rule in 2007, provision of inadequate security to late PM Benazir Bhutto which claimed her life by assassination, Akbar Bugti’s ‘murder’, the Lal Masjid operation, etc. To further complicate matters he is also on the Taliban hit list. Pervez Musharraf must surely be one of the most ill-advised persons in Pakistan to have entered the murky arena of politics; somebody within his group of close advisors must have given him a grossly misleading picture about what he would face in Pakistan, whether this was a deliberate act or merely flawed analysis of the situation on may be debatable. But to have given in to such apparently flawed advice, what does that say about Musharraf? One is left wondering why he, an intelligent individual, did not exercise some judgment and stayed where he was? By ignoring everything he is now facing the consequences of his decision for which he alone must bear blame other than those who advised him. His dreams of making a political comeback, of contesting and winning polls, of making a difference have shattered, while this was bound to happen we now await the final outcome of this drama to unfold. For the benefit of readers I am reproducing my article “Musharraf Under Siege”.
Whether for the good of the country or for selfish reasons to save himself and his cronies from retribution for the Kargil adventure, Musharraf violated Article 6 of the Constitution overthrowing an elected government in 1999. The Supreme Court (SC) became abettors to the coup by default when they gave him legal cover under the “Doctrine of Necessity” with some Honourable judges taking fresh oath under the Provisional Court Order (known as PCO-I). Prosecution for imposition of emergency in November 2007 is even more murky legally, restored by newly elected PM Gilani in April 2008, why were legal proceedings not initiated all this time (five years)?
The various allegations now being levelled against Musharraf include negligence leading to the assassination of Ms. Benazir, “murder” of Bugti, Lal Masjid, etc. Placed under house arrest, Gen Musharraf is charged with incarcerating the judges after proclaiming emergency in Nov 2007. The speed with which he is being legally pursued, one gets the impression that Musharraf is being hounded, negating the perception of a fair and impartial judiciary. Dragging their feet in the name of sustaining democracy, the SC successfully filibustered the NRO for over four years, tacitly permitting a thoroughly corrupt government to loot the country at will, giving PM Gilani (and thereafter Raja Pervez Ashraf) gross latitude for corruption, the scandals included misuse of power, nepotism, misuse of funds etc. Gilani was punished only for “contempt of court” when the ego of the Honourable SC itself was hurt. Judicial activism has been taken to its logical conclusion only when the SC itself is involved.
No case or FIR can be registered against the army (and by extension the Army Chief or the President) or the police on internal security duties or for conducting an operation. Musharraf was the President in November 2007, Zardari is the President today. Are we registering FIRs against Zardari or the PM for all the violence going on the country? How can FIR than be registered against Musharraf for Bugti, Benazir or Lal Masjid? What about a vast majority of our political elite paying laughably meager amounts of taxes despite blatantly flaunting their fabulous wealth? Issues of national importance and public interest notwithstanding, settling of personal scores seems to be the legal priority. The Caretaker Govt prudently decided indicting Musharraf was beyond their limited mandate.
Bugti declared a revolt against the State, publicly riding out of Dera Bugti on a camel brandishing an automatic rifle. Instead of the para-military Frontier Corps (FC) taking him to task, given its reasonable performance against Marri and Bugti militants, the regular army was inducted. Immature decisions down the line at GHQ and Corps levels resulted in the death of four very good officers negotiating Bugti’s surrender, killed alongwith Bugti when he detonated the explosives bringing down the roof of the cave where he was hiding. If they really wanted to murder him, a rocket launcher fired into the cave would have sufficed.
What about Rehman Malik’s rather bizarre behavior in running off with the “back-up” car abandoning his grievously injured leader, Ms. Benazir Bhutto, bleeding to death? Have the Honourable Judges gone through the findings of the UN Commission? Why should the buck stop at Musharraf’s desk as President for failing to give Benazir adequate protection, and was it deliberate? And why not prosecute the entire chain of command from the Federal Interior Ministry entrusted with protecting Ms. Benazir down the line to the local civil administration and the police?
Honourable Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui who cancelled Gen Musharraf’s bail in a bailable offence got 12000 votes as the MMA candidate in 2002 elections from NA-54 (Rawalpindi), this raises a question of conflict of interest and fairplay. Mullah Aziz’s lawyer in the Lal Masjid case, does his choice for judicial examination of Gen Musharraf meet the parameters of justice? Musharraf is not helped by the dissemination of an outright canard being spread electronically by the likes of Maj Gen (Retd) Nusrat Naeem (formerly of the ISI and from Musharraf’s regiment) about possible bias of ATC judge Kausar Abbas Zaidi, Naeem wrongly disparages him as a brother of a Capt (Retd) Mansur Zaidi (??), supposedly ordered court-martialled on Musharraf’s orders. Known as an upright person, Zaidi has a good reputation as a judge. Nusrat Naeem should have been court-martialled for his wife ordering an ISI detachment under her husband’s command to manhandle Pakistan Army’s most decorated soldier, Brig (Retd) Mohammad Taj, SJ & Bar. Having had to personally apologize to Brig Taj, Musharraf’s problems today originate from a whole lot of people like Nusrat Naeem.
Musharraf was delusional in expecting the streets to rise in protest, bringing into stark relief his naivety in politics. Unfortunately he excels in choosing his allies and advisers very badly. Consider the quality of their character, benefitting from Musharraf’s largesse and benevolence many deserted him in the countdown to his forced resignation in 2008. One cannot doubt that Musharraf is a patriot but patronizing “western liberal secularism” in the name of ‘enlightened moderation’, Musharraf created extremism that polarized society and helped sustain murderous strife, Islamic values and faith took a serious hit during his period.
One would not wish the humiliation that Pervez Musharraf is going through even on one’s enemy, let alone someone who was the Army Chief. He seldom reacted badly to criticism, unless it was for Kargil or if it was personal. He was smart enough to realize that if those who criticised him also praised him on doing something right, it became credible. Objectivity in journalism means praise has to be tempered with criticism, not praise for praise’s sake, nor criticism for criticism’s sake, both on an “as required” basis. Unfortunately that essence of objectivity in the print or electronic media never pleases anybody.
Musharraf’s hasty departure on extremely bad legal advice from the premises of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) after his bail was cancelled was played up by the media, it complicated matters and eroded his stature in public perception. Musharraf needs better legal counsel about the due process of the law. Notwithstanding that a section of the normally sane lawyer community seems to have gone berserk, judiciary must accord Musharraf the respect he should get as a former Army Chief, his treatment must not be seen to be tempered out of revenge, deliberately disparaging the uniform and the institution pursuing a motivated agenda. It is unthinkable that Pakistan’s former Army Chief be subjected to humiliation. The rank and file may not think the world of him as Musharraf would like others to believe it does, but he was their Chief. The consequent adverse effect on the morale could be counter-productive, might even create a backlash. A source of embarrassment for the military hierarchy, many are ready to believe he is being used as a convenient tool to cut the Army down to size.
On his part Musharraf has a duty to the country and to the Army he once commanded to face his present adversity with grace. Remember the saying in Ingall Hall in the Pakistan Military Academy (PMA), “it is not what happens to you that matters but how you behave while it is happening”.
