Re: Musharraf stepping down ceremony (COAS) in progress right now ....
Some complain that Musharraf deposed an elected Prime Minister. President Musharraf did not over take an elected prime minister ever (as he was not even in the country). When he took over, there was no prime minister, so-called Prime Minister NS was already got kicked, and was in prison. Army loyal to the country, fulfilling their duty to the country had already acted against a crook holding Office of Prime Minister, arrested him, and shoved him into prison.
As for NS getting sacked, the reason is that he lost his mandate to rule the country when Nawaz started breaking laws, and it was duty of police to beat him out of the office and court to give him punishment, what both did not.
NS breaking the laws: Apart of his corruption, that if any political person does, should get a huge kick from intelligence authorities and police, Nawaz broke the law by initiating attack on Supreme Court and further did treachery to the country by not ordering not to allow aircraft of Pakistan airline coming to the country of its origin to land. Both these crimes is first ever crime in any country, even most uncivilized country, by any person, even any dictator.
PM is crucial post where crooks and criminals cannot be tolerated for safety and security of the country, else country would go to dogs (get destroyed in every way). It was National duty of armed forces that when PM breaks the law, still police and judiciary is not acting against him for whatever reasons, they see that PM get punished for that.
As for politicians, people vote a politician on trust that they would serve the country and their interest without corruption and selfish actions, and if that person does than they lose the mandate even while in office. It is also in constitution (article 63) that a corrupt person cannot contest election, and if any corrupt person does, than they are contesting election on wrong declaration, and thus their getting election is invalid. It is also in Pakistani constitution that any corrupt person could not hold public office (article 62). So, even if a person holds public office (like in past BB and NS was holding), these corrupt politicians were not holding public office legally.
In other words, NS and BB contesting election was illegal and thus being Prime Minister was illegal. Similarly them holding public office was illegal and thus under constitution, they were never prime minister, but if they were holding prime minister office, they were doing that illegally, and all their actions as PM was illegal.
If army deposed NS than it was National duty that should have been done by police and judiciary, but when police and judiciary failed to do their duty, by default it becomes National duty of armed forces to act in the interest of the country and safeguard the country from corrupts who had taken over the office by deception and while in office broke the rule of the office required to stay in the office. One should remember that if that is not done, country could go to dogs easily ... what I mean is, if that would not happen, country would get destroyed easily, as with the help of money and deception, criminals and traitors could get into power through democratic means very easily.
Now, I would not like to say much but I am wondering what one can call people who support crooks and criminals holding public office and would consider that kicking such person who got into public office through deception (lying) and illegally holding public office or post of Prime Minister by army as treason.