Musharraf's Treason Case

[Leader]

At the end of the day, even Anarchy is not illegal. The nation as a whole can decide to overthrow every institution in Pakistan and if the nation agrees, that doing so is legal then even constitution has no worth.

Recall the Jan 2011 decision on Gilani's case. The one with various options. It gave various options but in the end Option 6 said - leave it to the political sovereign. Political sovereign is the public, the electorate.

IF the public accepted Musharraf's actions, nothing is above it.

Musharraf was ratified by:

1) Supreme Court
2) Referendum
3) Parliament

Hence I repeat, his coup on Oct 12, 1999 was not an illegal act.



You will have to prove coercion.

show me the provision of the constitution that shows you can over through elected government and get de facto period by courts in your favour and then elect yourself as president with uniform by a puppet parliament ?

the constitution gives right to assembly with reasonable restrictions to maintain law and order... anarchy by no means is legal..

P.s. the precedence you are trying to suggest, is not appropriate here, contempt of court and over throwing elected govt and suspending the constitution twice, are two different cases..

people's will and army's intervention are altogether two different things... if people attack and over through elected government that would still be revolution, but army taking over is badmashi !!

 

[Pksecurity]

He is not being prosecuted for his coup of 1999 when he sacked an elected government. He is being prosecuted for emergency of Nov 2007 when he sacked the judges. Was sacking a government major crime, which was validated by SC, or sacking of the judges? This is the question which we should debate here. Moreover, judiciary was a victim, how can it prosecute in violation of rule of natural justice which says, nobody can be a judge in his own cause. Not only Musharraf but SC itself is on trial through this case.

 

[Jango]

Since I am not a lawyer, and I do not have the wisdom to have your certainty of being convinced that Gen Musharraf did not commit the crimes he is accused of, I guess I will let the Supreme Court decide in its infinite wisdom how to rule on this case.

please don't believe that the supreme court will be totally impartial ... there are alot OF egos and personal vendettas in play here.

 

[Awesome]

show me the provision of the constitution that shows you can over through elected government and get de facto period by courts in your favour and then elect yourself as president with uniform by a puppet parliament ?

Your scenario has two parts.

1) Overthrow of government - May be illegal, but who is going to decide on that? Supreme Court.
2) Supreme Court says, not illegal. Supreme court may declare day as night. It has the authority.
3) Supreme court declared not legal person conducts a referendum and gets nod from political sovereign. Political Sovereign who are above everyone, votes him as president.
4) Supreme Court and Political Sovereign approved person conducts an election and brings a government.
5) Supreme Court, Political Sovereign and Government votes legalizes Musharraf's coup.

 

[A.Rafay]

Dont know if he came for "iktedaar ki lalach" or he really came because he cared for the people of Pakistan! He knew he would be sued in courts and put on ECL!

 

[batmannow]

Musharraf should be made an example, so that no military officer ever dare to threaten the State System again...

Including those Who Ever Took Any Oath Under Him?
Ohh Are We Talking about IK Ohh, No Its Not Him Only Its Our Dear Monte-carlo Cj Too, & mr Kiyani Too?
Lets Hang Them Alll?

 

[Leader]

Your scenario has two parts.

1) Overthrow of government - May be illegal, but who is going to decide on that? Supreme Court.
2) Supreme Court says, not illegal. Supreme court may declare day as night. It has the authority.
3) Supreme court declared not legal person conducts a referendum and gets nod from political sovereign. Political Sovereign who are above everyone, votes him as president.
4) Supreme Court and Political Sovereign approved person conducts an election and brings a government.
5) Supreme Court, Political Sovereign and Government votes legalizes Musharraf's coup.

no I didnt say that, thats what you are saying...even if SC decides by the law of necessity, we still are a Republic, hence no institution is bigger than the constitution itself.

I can understand that you like Musharraf so you want a legal justification for his illegal acts, but come on, nobody is above the law...can you do the same in national interest?

by your logic even Taliban are doing right, as its their right to enforce their will on Pakistani nation...so if somehow they get to over through government, and get a leaflet decision in their favour, what will be your stance ?


P.S. anyway PTI has taken Musharraf to court for treason.

AFP: Pakistan court orders Musharraf to appear over treason

Treason Case: SC summons Musharraf,4/8/2013 6:49:03 PM

will be fought by Hamid Khan

 

[batmannow]

show me the provision of the constitution that shows you can over through elected government and get de facto period by courts in your favour and then elect yourself as president with uniform by a puppet parliament ?

the constitution gives right to assembly with reasonable restrictions to maintain law and order... anarchy by no means is legal..

P.s. the precedence you are trying to suggest, is not appropriate here, contempt of court and over throwing elected govt and suspending the constitution twice, are two different cases..

people's will and army's intervention are altogether two different things... if people attack and over through elected government that would still be revolution, but army taking over is badmashi !!

Just Enjoy Ur Dream Of This Damocrazy & Keep fooling Urself That A Fast Bowler Some How Will Win A E
Ection & Wil
Clean Everything In Pakistan Wake Up Buddy, Lets See Of There Is Another Coup You Can Even Come Out Of Your Home?

 

[Awesome]

There are many more constitutional defences that can be invoked by Musharraf.

1) As President he has a right to invoke emergency
-- but Judges stayed that order. They have a right to stay anything in Pakistan
2) But he declared emergency as COAS.
-- IF you read the armed forces section of the constitution it clearly states you cannot drag Army's actions into a civilian court. He may invoke that constitutional clause.

[(1)] The Armed Forces shall, under the directions of the Federal Government, defend Pakistan against external aggression or threat of war, and, subject to law, act in aid of civil power when called upon to do

(2) The validity of any direction issued by the Federal Government under clause (1) shall not be called in question in any court.

He just needs to say that Shaukat Aziz as PM ordered him to impose emergency as COAS and I think Shaukat Aziz will confirm it happily and that's that.

 

[Argus Panoptes]

please don't believe that the supreme court will be totally impartial ... there are alot OF egos and personal vendettas in play here.

The recent acts by the Supreme Court clearly show that is is as partial as the rest of the political players in the country, but when the highest court in the land behaves as a thug for hire, just like the Army, or the politicians, what can a citizen do but accept her fate?

 

[batmannow]

The recent acts by the Supreme Court clearly show that is is as partial as the rest of the political players in the country, but when the highest court in the land behaves as a thug for hire, just like the Army, or the politicians, what can a citizen do but accept her fate?

To Just Wait For The Next Coup To Happen, As All We Did In 99?

 

[Sedqal]

Just Enjoy Ur Dream Of This Damocrazy & Keep fooling Urself That A Fast Bowler Some How Will Win A E
Ection & Wil
Clean Everything In Pakistan Wake Up Buddy, Lets See Of There Is Another Coup You Can Even Come Out Of Your Home?

You are one deluded fellow Pubic will decide the next govt through there votes and you will have to live with that.

There are many more constitutional defences that can be invoked by Musharraf.

1) As President he has a right to invoke emergency
-- but Judges stayed that order. They have a right to stay anything in Pakistan
2) But he declared emergency as COAS.
-- IF you read the armed forces section of the constitution it clearly states you cannot drag Army's actions into a civilian court. He may invoke that constitutional clause.



He just needs to say that Shaukat Aziz as PM ordered him to impose emergency as COAS and I think Shaukat Aziz will confirm it happily and that's that.

Musharraf is hated by a common Pakistani, political entities which helped him are today fighting for their very survival. He is done.

 

[Awesome]

The recent acts by the Supreme Court clearly show that is is as partial as the rest of the political players in the country, but when the highest court in the land behaves as a thug for hire, just like the Army, or the politicians, what can a citizen do but accept her fate?

There are two parallels between Supreme Court and Musharraf that I like to draw here, besides the legality of it all.

Musharraf has said sorry for his past mistakes

CJP has said sorry for his past mistakes

The actions of both have been proper ever since and it clearly shows they have learned their lessons.

Musharraf's key lessons were NRO mistake and going against the media (which ironically he himself freed)
CJP's key lessons were bowing to the doctrine of necessity.

They both have said sorry, we should accept it and go after the real culprits - Nawaz and Zardari who we are treating as if they are doodh ke dhulay huay... This is our failing. Military men, Judicial men come and go. Dynasties have lived on in the subcontinent since forever. Break dynastic politics and then you will empower the common man. Himmat hai toh gaon ke chaudhary ko challenge karo.

We love controversies so much that we are ready to make non-issues the be all end all of issues and remain blinded to the real issues. We are puppets at the hands of these puppeteers. What's the one thing Zardari did in these 5 years? Usne humein koi na koi truck ki batti ke peeche lagaye rakha...

 

[Argus Panoptes]

..............

They both have said sorry, we should accept it and go after the real culprits - Nawaz and Zardari who we are treating as if they are doodh ke dhulay huay... This is our failing. Military men, Judicial men come and go. Dynasties have lived on in the subcontinent since forever. Break dynastic politics and then you will empower the common man. Himmat hai toh gaon ke chaudhary ko challenge karo.

We love controversies so much that we are ready to make non-issues the be all end all of issues and remain blinded to the real issues. We are puppets at the hands of these puppeteers. What's the one thing Zardari did in these 5 years? Usne humein koi na koi truck ki batti ke peeche lagaye rakha...

I agree with you that meting out justice to both Nawaz and Zardari is more important than anything in the past, as these two and their cohorts are destroying our present and our future. I am sure that Nawaz will get his answer from the nation in the elections, and Zardari will meet his inevitable justice once his term as President is over in a few short months.

 

[Emmie]

Since I am not a lawyer, and I do not have the wisdom to have your certainty of being convinced that Gen Musharraf did not commit the crimes he is accused of, I guess I will let the Supreme Court decide in its infinite wisdom how to rule on this case.

He did commit a crime, subverting the constitution is a crime in any event. What important to note is that his act/crime of 99 was given indemnity by the parliament in 2002 (LFO), let me add MMA played a big role in indemnification. The gist, he committed a crime that later on got indemnity so he cannot be indicted for his indemnified crime of 99. However his act of imposition of emergency in 2007 is still an uncovered crime & he can be tried for this, in fact SC had already issued a ruling, declaring it unconstitutional.