Musharraf's treason trial

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
41

Re: Musharraf’s treason trial

**

**You mean these: It was not a big mistake but a deliberate action, after lots of evil thinking of dictator to save the core criminals of his community and save his seat of power. Parhta ja aor sharmata ja.
**
**Top MQM leaders among NRO beneficiaries

**SLAMABAD, Nov 19 Top leaders of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, including its chief Altaf Hussain, Parliamentary Leader in the National Assembly Dr Farooq Sattar, Federal Minister Babar Ghauri, Sindh Minister Shoaib Bokhari and a number of former lawmakers, are among the beneficiaries of the National Reconciliation Ordinance, according to the list sent by the National Accountability Bureau to the government on Thursday.

According to the list, eight cases were registered against Altaf Hussain in Mirpurkhas, Zaman Town, Kalakot, Brigade, Quaidabad and Nazimabad police stations between 1986 and 1995.

One case was registered against Dr Farooq Sattar in 1992 in Korangi police station, while four in Quaidabad, Aziz Bhatti, Landhi and Korangi police stations in 1994.

Six cases were registered against Shoaib Bokhari in Nazimabad, Orangi Town, Korangi, Mominabad and Zaman Town police stations.

Five cases were registered against MNA Waseem Akhtar in Korangi, Quaidabad, Zaman Town and Aziz Bhatti police stations.

The list included the names of Karachi`s deputy Nazim, Nasrin Jalil, former adviser to the Sindh chief minister S. Manzoor Hussain, former senator Ishtiaq Azhar, former convener of the MQM Rabita Committee Dr Imran Farooq and two members of the committee Saleem Shahzad and Tariq Javed.

A former provincial minister, Qazi Khalid, who was appointed judge of the Sindh High Court on the recommendation of former chief justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, is also among the beneficiaries of NRO, according to the bureau.

Former members of the Sindh Assembly Azhar Mian, Irshad Baig, Jawed Akhtar, Dr Sagheer Ahmed, M. Haroon Siddiqui, S. M. Mohiuddin, Abdul Qadir Lakhani, Mirza Afzal Baig, Suhail Saleem Mashahdi and Kamran Jaffery also benefited from the NRO, the list said.

Ajmal Dehlvi is also on the list of beneficiaries.

The names of certain people, including Ishtiaq Azhar and Khalid Murtaza, appeared on the list more than once. Khalid Murtaza was a leading trade unionist of the Pakistan Steel Mills. He was paralysed in alleged firing by Rangers in early 90s and is currently working in MQM`s Khidmat-i-Khalq Foundation.

The names of former MNA Shaikh Liaquat Hussain, who passed away recently, former MPA Afzal Anwar, who expired some 4-5 years ago, and former MNA and member of the Rabita Committee Hassan Musanna Alvi, who died last year, are also on the list.

Other NRO beneficiaries belonging to the MQM are former president of the Karachi Bar Association, Amin Lakhani, and Liaquatabad town nazim Usama Qadri, the NAB said.

Rabita Committee member Kanwar Khalid Younus told Dawn that almost all cases against leaders and workers of the MQM were criminal in nature. He said it was easy to book one in a criminal case and FIRs were registered in one go.

He said there were no cases of financial irregularity against the MQM leadership as one had to substantiate the charges with evidence.

He said 94 criminal cases were registered against him and he contested all of them and got himself cleared. He said his party would fight any cases brought against its leaders by the government.**

MQM benefited the most from NRO

**The list has names of about 5,800 people who were facing financial irregularities and criminal cases. The list obtained by Dawn shows that 3,775 cases (mostly criminal) were against leaders and workers of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM). **

42

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

^^^ but MQM says that they did not benefited from NRO, but all cases were politically motivated cases and they got them sorted out through court, one by one. There this claims make sense too .. and has lot of weight because ...

Iftikhar (as CJ of Supeme Court) declared NRO null and void, making all cases that can be written off due to NRO valid, had no sympathy with MQM, so how can anyone think that with Iftikhar in charge, anyone he did not liked could have benefited from NRO?

Obviously, Zardari (the biggest bhatta khor, murderer of Murtaza Bhutto and many, thug of the highest order, thief and plunderer) did benefited from NRO, but it was not because of NRO but because Zardari corrupt government did not wanted to pursue the cases against Zardari (even at the expense of PM), regardless of Supreme court rulings.

43

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

^^^ And you believe in mqm. Read the news item again if you don't understand. MQM was definitely the major beneficiary in NRO. Don't forget this when you talk about Zardari.

44

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

Aap ab havai firing ker rahay ho :)

When NRO was made null and void by Supreme Court, all cases that could have got withdrawn due to NRO became valid cases, then how can anyone benefited from NRO?

On the other hand, there was no blanket withdrawal of cases due to NRO, as according to NRO, if government of the time thinks after investigation that certain case is politically motivated, than only government can initiate it to get the case withdrawn.

But Supreme Court ruling said that NRO was illegal, and thus no cases can be withdrawn ... and if any case is withdrawn than that should get re-instated. It was because of this ruling, Zardari case in Switzerland that was withdrawn, Supreme Court wanted it to get re-instated.

45

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

So what stopped him to go after murderers and rapists?

46

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

Because there were no murderers and rapists. Nothing got proven in court, as all was propaganda of PPP and PMLN propaganda machine, trying to stop spread of MQM in their constituencies of illiterates ... and no doubt they succeeded from what propaganda can do.

47

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

^^^Read the red bolder news item again or use magnifying glass.

48

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

^^^ Do not worry, I do not write without reading, understanding and analyzing the issue ... and I can differentiate between lies, propaganda and truth. What i wrote is not only true but is logical too (I also backed my claims logically in my arguments)... and whatever I wrote, can be verified by anyone who is unbiased.

49

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

Same here when you write logic and truth. Justifying a lie with even 1000 pages, I will never read and never accept bs nonsense.

50

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

reading posts, we all can tell who write BS full of illogical nonsense. :)

51

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

o.k. Good night, sleep tight.

52

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

Where do you see the country? The Constitution only talks about provincial governments (as can be seen in the previous link).

Part X: Emergency Provisions
232 Proclamation of emergency on account of war, internal disturbance, etc.
(1) If the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which the security of Pakistan, or any part thereof, is threatened by war or external aggression, or by internal disturbance beyond the power of a Provincial Government to control, he may issue a Proclamation of Emergency 604:] 604

 605[Provided that for imposition of emergency due to internal disturbances beyond the powers of a Provincial Government to control, a Resolution from the Provincial Assembly of that Province shall be required: 

Provided further that if the President acts on his own, the Proclamation of Emergency shall be placed before both Houses of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) for approval by each House within ten days. ] 605

(2) Notwithstanding anything in the Constitution, while a Proclamation of Emergency is in force, 606
(a) Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) shall have power to make laws for a Province, or any part thereof, with respect to any matter not enumerated in the Federal Legislative List or the Concurrent Legislative List;
] 606
(b) the executive authority of the Federation shall extend to the giving of directions to a Province as to the manner in which the executive authority of the Province is to be exercised, and
(c) the Federal Government may by 607 Order assume to itself, or direct the Governor of a Province to assume on behalf of the Federal Government, all or any of the functions of the Government of the Province, and all or any of the powers vested in, or exercisable by, any body or authority in the Province other than the Provincial Assembly, and make such incidental and consequential provisions as appear to the Federal Government to be necessary or desirable for giving effect to the objects of the Proclamation, including provisions for suspending, in whole or in part, the operation of any provisions of the Constitution relating to any body or authority in the province:

Provided that nothing in paragraph (c) shall authorize the Federal Government to assume to itself, or direct the Governor of the Province to assume on its behalf, any of the powers vested in or exercisable by a High Court, or to suspend either in whole or in part the operation of any provisions of the Constitution relating to High Courts.

(3) The power of 608[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] 608 to make laws for a Province with respect to any matter shall include power to make laws conferring powers and imposing duties, or authorizing the conferring of powers and the imposition of duties upon the Federation, or officers and authorities of the Federation, as respects that matter.

(4) Nothing in this Article shall restrict the power of a Provincial Assembly to make any law which under the Constitution it has power to make but if any provision of a Provincial law is repugnant to any provision of an Act of 609[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] 609 which 610[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] 610 has under this Article power to make, the Act of 611[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] 611, whether passed before or after the Provincial law, shall prevail and the Provincial law shall, to the extent of the repugnancy, but so long only as the Act of 612[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] 612 continues to have effect, be void.

(5) A law made by 613[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] 613, which 614[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] 614 would not but for the issue of a Proclamation of Emergency have been competent to make, shall, to the extent of the incompetency, cease to have effect on the expiration of a period of six months after the Proclamation of Emergency has ceased to be in force, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before the expiration of the said period.

(6) While a Proclamation of Emergency is in force, 615[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] 615 may by law extend the term of the National Assembly for a period not exceeding one year and not extending in any case beyond a period of six months after the Proclamation has ceased to be in force.

(7) A Proclamation of Emergency shall be laid before a joint sitting which shall be summoned by the President to meet within thirty days of the Proclamation being issued and,
(a) shall cease to be in force at the expiration of two months unless before the expiration of that period it has been approved by a resolution of the joint sitting; and
616
(b) shall, subject to the provisions of paragraph (a), cease to be in force upon a resolution disapproving the Proclamation being passed by the votes of the majority of the total memberships of the two Houses in joint sitting.
] 616

(8) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (7), if the National Assembly stands dissolved at the time when a Proclamation of Emergency is issued, the Proclamation shall continue in force for a period of four months but, if a general election to the Assembly is not held before the expiration of that period, it shall cease to be in force at the expiration of that period unless it has earlier been approved by a resolution of the Senate.

53

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

^^^ Same to you ... have a nice sleep, and while waiting for sleep, think that 'loyalty to corrupts' would not give you anything after death. :)

54

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

I never been loyal to any corrupt, nor you should be loyal to murderers, rapists, bhatta khors.

55

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

You should know that constitution also follows how it was understood and implemented in past.

Constitution talks about imposing emergency in the country (first emergency imposed on Pakistan was by Z A Bhutto, just after constitution got approved) in 1973, suspending basic human rights of all citizens all over country.

Secondly, if you would read the constitution, it does not talk about imposing emergency in province. It only says that if law and order situation occurs or foreign threat happens (focus of all foreign threat is country and not province ... though a particular province can experience that threat), such that province could not tackle, than emergency can be imposed.

56

Re: Musharraf’s treason trial

Treason: the real test - DAWN.COM

WHEN a former military ruler is put in the dock for treason in a country which has been under dictatorships for the most part of its existence, it is no less than history being made. The trial of retired Gen Pervez Musharraf is a landmark development in many ways.

Many Pakistani political leaders faced treason charges, but it is for the first time that a former head of state is being tried under Article 6 of the Constitution. The former military strongman is expected to be indicted by a special tribunal comprising three high court judges on Jan 1, 2014.

This case has all the ingredients of high drama with far-reaching political consequences. The trial of a former army chief in a country where the military remains a formidable force casting its shadow over politics may have serious ramifications.

For Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, it may be an opportunity to settle scores with a man who not only deposed him but also put him on trial for sedition. There’s certainly a revenge aspect to the decision to initiate the treason trial, though the government maintains it only complied with the Supreme Court ruling.

Some opposition leaders have also accused the government of using the trial to divert public attention from its failure to address other key issues.

But Musharraf’s aides are confident the trial will collapse. “He has not committed any treason and the case will fall apart if the trial is fair and unbiased,” says retired Maj Gen Rashid Qureshi, a long-time associate of the former president.

A formidable defence team headed by the crafty Sharifuddin Pirzada, an old hand at constitutional law, could complicate things for the prosecution. Some observers believe the trial may even drag on to Musharraf’s advantage.

The Islamabad High Court has already dismissed the objection raised by the defence on the legality of the tribunal and the plea that the case be shifted to a military court. But the issue of the trial’s constitutional validity is likely to dominate the proceedings. The former general is being tried not for his original sin of staging a coup against an elected government but for his Nov 3, 2007 action of imposing emergency and holding the Constitution in abeyance.

“Pro-prosecution bias and being selective about the incident could be a strong argument for the defence,” maintains a senior constitutional lawyer. This appears to be the main point Musharraf’s lawyers will take up.

The main argument for not charging Musharraf for the Oct 12, 1999 coup is that his action was indemnified by the Supreme Court and parliament. But the question is whether the 2007 action alone provides sufficient ground for his trial under Article 6, ignoring the original takeover.

Some senior lawyers argue that the term ‘abeyance’ was added to Article 6 by the 18th Amendment and thus cannot be applied retrospectively. Before the amendment, Article 6 mentioned only the terms ‘abrogation’ and ‘subversion’ of the Constitution.

They argue there was no point in introducing the word ‘abeyance’ in Article 6 as it was already covered by ‘subversion’, and that the amendment has inadvertently benefited Musharraf. “The element of surprise will be our major weapon in the trial,” says Ahmed Raza Kasuri, a member of the defence team.

Since ending his self-imposed exile and returning home earlier this year, Musharraf has been implicated in multiple murder cases. But the treason trial will be his most serious test.

Musharraf may appear relaxed, but things can go wrong. “He returned to the country of his own will and is mentally prepared to face any situation,” said Qureshi.

Breaking his silence, Musharraf recently gave interviews to a couple of private television channels appearing his usual confident self.

But what could be the worst scenario? Conviction and the death sentence? Doubtful. The humiliation of their former chief has already perturbed the military and many observers believe that conviction could result in a strong reaction by the army. The military leadership seems to have distanced itself from the trial. But the manner in which the trial proceeds may change the dynamics. A prolonged trial could generate immense challenges for the already fragile political structure.

The writer is a political and security analyst.

57

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

1) Read post # 52.
2) Legal by precedent is not legal & just b/c previous dictators got away with coups and suspending the constitution does not mean Mushy should get away, too.

58

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

^^^ Sorry, I missed your post #52. I will read it carefully and would come to you later.

Anyhow, as in your post ... let see the words of the constitution for emergency:

Part X: Emergency Provisions

**[TABLE]

232
Proclamation of emergency on account of war, internal disturbance, etc.
[TABLE]
[TR]
TD
If the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which the security of Pakistan, or any part thereof, is threatened by war or external aggression, or by internal disturbance beyond the power of a Provincial Government to control, he may issue a Proclamation of Emergency

[/TD]
[/TR]

**
Above paragraph means ... President can impose emergency in two cases:

1: If the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which the security of Pakistan, or any part thereof, is threatened by war or external aggression

*Or *

2: **by internal disturbance beyond the power of a Provincial Government to control, he may issue a Proclamation of Emergency

**It is obvious from above wordings that ... by default, emergency is imposed on country, but constitution also gives provision to impose emergency on Province (any particular Province) if required.

In case 1 ... President would impose emergency on country.

In case 2 ... President would impose emergency on Province ... but if provincial matter is such that it can effect whole country then emergency can be imposed on country.

What I know (or understood from various sources), that November 2007 emergency was imposed on country due to threat to the country from terrorism (Pakistan army was fighting terrorism and court was not punishing but releasing the terrorists). Another factor was financial, where court obstructing running of state financial matters, and that was again affecting whole country. Hence emergency on country ... and that emergecny was declared on advice of Prime Minister, Cabinet, Provincial governors and Chief Ministers of all 4 provinces. Later emergency got approval from Parliament, Senate and '7 bench Supreme Court'. Further, it was army chief that declared the emergency on behalf of President ... due to terrorism in the country damaging or affecting the security of the country.

59

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

I agree. It all seems a charade.

60

Re: Musharraf's treason trial

Assuming your argument is valid in scenario 1 and Mushy was legally justified in declaring emergency in the country than how do you explain:

1) He did that as an army chief & not as the president (thus it would be considered a coup invoking article 6)
2) What was the legal justification for suspending the Constitution?
3) If you read the Constitutional it clearly states that joint sitting of the parliament must approve presidential actions, and that never happened.