And if it indeed is the endgame (a very depressing word), what do we win and what do we lose…?
As always a good sum up by Zafar Abbas.
But ponder we must over the pros, cons, shockwaves and after affects, gains and losses, course of action and who to look upto, and what to expect…
http://dawn.com/2007/09/16/top10.htm
Is this the endgame?
By Zaffar Abbas
THIS Monday marks the beginning of what can best be described as the ‘endgame’. The following couple of weeks, if not the next few days, are likely to see a chain of events unfolding in quick succession that may have a major impact on the country’s political, constitutional and, possibly, the security situation.
There are some who believe the countdown may have already begun. Others equally close to the country’s political and security establishment are of the view that the exercise to explore options to end the current atmosphere of uncertainty was still on, which was aimed at avoiding any drastic measure that may undermine the entire system.
Some of the crucial things that are at stake in this atmosphere of extreme uncertainty include: President Musharraf’s own position, both as the head of the state and the army chief, the judiciary’s role as an independent body for delivering justice, fate of the present assemblies and, in a way, the sovereignty of parliament.
During the same period the appointment of the new Vice Chief of Army Staff, if not the army chief, is to be made, which may also re-structure the top hierarchy of the military establishment and its thinking. They may seem like separate issues, but a close study would show that in a strange way they are closely linked, and decision in one area was certain to have a domino effect.
The most crucial of these is the president’s election as the incumbent has already declared his desire to get himself re-elected for another five-year term. This move alone is directly linked to all other matters, be they administrative, political or constitutional.
The announcement of the schedule for the presidential election is already due, and if the cut-off date of October 15 for polls is to be honoured, it cannot be delayed beyond a few more days. In any case, this is not going to prevent a judicial intervention by the Supreme Court on the question of eligibility of a candidate for the president’s election.
Starting on Monday, a nine-member bench will be hearing a number of constitutional petitions to decide whether Gen Musharraf is entitled to hold the dual offices of the President and COAS as he seeks a second term as the head of the state. The Chief Justice, Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry has, in order to avoid any criticism of having a personal bias, already decided not to preside over the bench.
The court has asked three prominent constitutional experts, S. M. Zafar, Hafeez Pirzada and Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan, to assist them as amicus curie or friends of the court. The Attorney General is also to give his presentation, and the court may also like to hear the petitioners’ counsel. In theory, all this may take at least a few days if not a couple of weeks, before the apex court arrives at a decision.
Regardless of the decision, in the meantime, the Chief Election Commissioner will have to announce the schedule for the president’s elections. However, it has been a matter of intense debate within the legal fraternity whether the assemblies, whose members form the electoral college for the president’s election, can be dissolved once the election date is set and the schedule announced.
Some constitutional experts say Article 41(3) and the Second Schedule, which explains the procedure, is silent on the matter. According to one seasoned legal mind there is no bar on the president’s constitutional right to dissolve the national assembly, particularly on the prime minister’s advice under Article 58(1). But there are several lawyers who say such an issue has never come before a court of law and, in the present situation, the issue of president’s moral, if not constitutional, authority may come into question if an attempt is made to dissolve the assembly once there is a clear verdict about his own candidature.
Senior members of the governing PML-Q admit this creates a serious problem for the president because if the Supreme Court’s verdict comes after the announcement of the elections schedule, and is against his right to hold two offices, it may leave no choice for Gen Musharraf but to opt out of the race.
BIG QUESTION: The big question is, given the current political and security situation, can he afford to take such a risk?
Sources close to the decision-making group in the presidential camp say that with so much being at stake, the President may not like to become a casualty of what has come to be known as judicial activism. If true, then the possibility of an extreme administrative action by him, and that too in the next few days, starts to look real.
Even otherwise, under the circumstances what possible options does he have? And is it possible for him to avoid such an action through some kind of political action?
A number of options are presently being contemplated at the highest level, but no one is prepared to say with authority what really is on the President’s mind, and how far was he thinking of going in order to save the system created by him from total collapse.
Islamabad is already abuzz with speculation that serious consideration is being given to emergency rule, and that too of a kind which would only be a notch less than martial law. One very senior member of the PML-Q is of the view that in such a situation all fundamental rights could be suspended and perhaps even judicial activism could be curbed. Regardless of the controversial nature of such a move, it may give Gen Musharraf some time, possibly a year, to consolidate his rule and re-think his policies.
Another option is to dissolve the National Assembly on the Prime Minister’s advice without waiting for the Supreme Court’s verdict before the presidential elections. This would mean postponement of the presidential election, giving General Musharraf a few more months, as Article 41 (4) of the Constitution says the elections would then be held thirty days after the election of the new national assembly.
Yet another option is to dissolve the assembly after striking a deal with Benazir Bhutto to ensure his re-election as a civilian president from the new assemblies. The deal would mean a constitutional amendment for getting a waiver from a two-year ban on retiring government servants contesting and holding public office. In return he may have to accept her terms, including the abolition of the president’s controversial power to dissolve the assembly under Article 58-2(b) and removal of the ban from becoming a prime minister for the third time.
This would then also mean that he would need to appoint his successor in the army, within the next week or so, with the hope that he is not only competent but also has a sense of loyalty towards him and allegiance to his political and security policies. Most observers say all this is easier said than done. They also agree that it’s a race against time for the President and he needs to act fast. The big question is, even if he opts for extreme action like the imposition of emergency rule, it may only give him a few months to manoeuvre political room for himself. And given the kind of build-up that is taking place on the political and judicial front in the country, it would be difficult to assume that he will be able to keep his grip on the situation for long.
Most observers say the president is contemplating action in the coming days to protect his rule but what he needs to realize is that after serving for eight years, it may be time for him to think in terms of an exit strategy. This strategy could span a few weeks, months or even a couple of years, depending on how he plays his cards.