Why Bring Treason Charges Against Pervez Musharraf?

[RiazHaq]

How did General Musharraf govern Pakistan? What did he do right? Where did he go wrong? What is his record in terms of human development and economic growth from 2000 to 2007? Is the Supreme Court right in hearing a petition to charge him with treason? If so, who can or should bring such charges?

Comparison of Pervez Musharraf's Social (HDI) and Economic (GDP) Performance With Predecessors and Successors

Viewpoint from Overseas host Faraz Darvesh discusses with Riaz Haq and Ali Hasan Cemendtaur high treason case against Pervez Musharraf under Article 6; Chief Justic Iftikhar Chaudhry's activism; Musharraf's performance during his rule; and Pakistan Army's role in politics.

This show was recorded at 12:30 pm PST on Thursday, April 11, 2013.
Pakistani Elections 2013, Cases against Pervez Musharraf, High Treason, Article 6 Riaz Haq, Sabahat Ashraf, iFaqeer, Ali Hasan Cemendtaur, WBT-TV, Viewpoint from Overseas, Pakistanis in the US, Silicon Valley Pakistanis, San Francisco Bay Area Pakistanis.

پاکستانی انتخابات ۲۰۱۳، طالبان کراچی میں، اے این پی کو خطرات ، فراز درویش ، ریاض حق، صباحت اشرف، آءی فقیر، علی حسن سمندطور، ڈبلیو بی ٹی ٹی وی، ویو پواءنٹ فرام اوورسیز، امریکہ میں پاکستانی، سلیکن ویلی، سان فرانسسکو بے ایریا
पाकिस्तान, कराची, विएव्पोइन्त फ्रॉम ओवरसीज , फ़राज़ दरवेश, रिअज़ हक , सबाहत अशरफ , ई फ़क़ीर, अली हसन समंदतौर, दब्लेव बी टी टीवी, सिलिकॉन वेली, कैलिफोर्निया, फार्रुख शाह खान, फार्रुख खान
পাকিস্তান, করাচী, ক্যালিফর্নিয়া, সিলিকোন ভ্যালি, ভিয়েব্পৈন্ট ফরম ওভারসিস

 

[RiazHaq]

The high treason act says that, “No court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under this act except upon a complaint in writing made by a person authorized by the Federal Government in this behalf.”

High treason or high drama?

You cannot have it both ways

For clarity’s sake, you should know Article 6 of the constitution and the Act of Punishment for High Treason and what they entail as well as the 2007 Proclamation of Emergency. We will leave most of the discussion on them for next week.

They apparently want to try Musharraf not for the army’s 1999 intervention and the first Provisional Constitution Order or PCO but for the 2007 emergency and the second PCO. The Proclamation of Emergency 2007 includes the prime minister, governors and the military high command, but not the judges, for the proclamation went against them. Therein lies a tale: if Musharraf is tried only for the 2007 emergency the judges will be off the hook but if for the 1999 countercoup they will hang high if found guilty. Do they think that that way they can keep themselves out of the fire? Treason is treason: if something is treason in 1999 it remains treason in 2007. Treason cannot be legal when it suits you and a crime when it suits you. You cannot have it both ways.

Is it that the army’s countercoup and the first PCO were legal in 1999 because the judges who gave it legitimacy and took oaths under it saved their jobs while the 2007 emergency and the second PCO were illegal because most of the first PCO’s judges lost their jobs? The conclusion is inescapable.

Article 6 says:

“(1) Any person who abrogates or subverts or suspends or holds in abeyance, or attempts or conspires to abrogate or subvert or suspend or hold in abeyance, the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.

2) Any person aiding or abetting or collaborating [in] the acts mentioned in clause (1) shall likewise be guilty of high treason.

(2A) An act of high treason mentioned in clause (1) or clause (2) shall not be validated by any court including the Supreme Court and a High Court.

(3) Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) shall by law provide for the punishment of persons found guilty of high treason.”

The High Treason Act says:

“An Act to provide for the punishment of persons found guilty of acts of abrogation or subversion of a Constitution or of high treason.

Preamble: Whereas it is necessary to provide for the punishment of persons found guilty of acts of abrogation or subversion of a Constitution or of high treason;

It is hereby enacted as follows:

1. Short title, extent and commencement:

(1) This act may be called the High Treason (Punishment) Act, 1973.

(2) It extends to the whole of Pakistan.

(3) It shall come into force at once.

2. Punishment for high treason, etc: A person who is found guilty:

(a) of having committed an act of abrogation or subversion of a constitution in force in Pakistan at any time since the twenty third day of March, 1956; or

(b) of high treason as defined in Article 6 of the Constitution, shall be punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

3. Procedure: No Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under this act except upon a complaint in writing made by a person authorised by the Federal Government in this behalf.

The Proclamation of Emergency of 2007 says:

WHEREAS there is visible ascendancy in the activities of extremists and incidents of terrorist attacks, including suicide bombings, IED explosions, rocket firing and bomb explosions and the banding together of some militant groups have taken such activities to an unprecedented level of violent intensity posing a grave threat to the life and property of the citizens of Pakistan;

WHEREAS there has also been a spate of attacks on state infrastructure and on law-enforcement agencies;

WHEREAS some members of the judiciary are working at cross purposes with the executive and legislature in the fight against terrorism and extremism, thereby weakening the government and the nation’s resolve and diluting the efficacy of its actions to control this menace;

WHEREAS there has been increasing interference by some members of the judiciary in government policy, adversely affecting economic growth, in particular;

WHEREAS constant interference in executive functions, including but not limited to the control of terrorist activity, economic policy, price controls, downsizing of corporations and urban planning, has weakened the writ of the government; the police force has been completely demoralized and is fast losing its efficacy to fight terrorism and intelligence agencies have been thwarted in their activities and prevented from pursuing terrorists;

WHEREAS some hard-core militants, extremists, terrorists and suicide bombers, who were arrested and being investigated, were ordered to be released. The persons so released have subsequently been involved in heinous terrorist activities, resulting in loss of human life and property. Militants across the country have, thus, been encouraged while law-enforcement agencies subdued;

WHEREAS some judges by overstepping the limits of judicial authority have taken over the executive and legislative functions;

WHEREAS the government is committed to the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law and holds the superior judiciary in high esteem, it is nonetheless of paramount importance that the honourable judges confine the scope of their activity to the judicial function and not assume charge of administration;

WHEREAS an important constitutional institution, the Supreme Judicial Council, has been made entirely irrelevant and by a recent order judges have, thus, made themselves immune from inquiry into their conduct and put themselves beyond accountability;

WHEREAS the humiliating treatment meted to government officials by some members of the judiciary on a routine basis during court proceedings has demoralised the civil bureaucracy and senior government functionaries, to avoid being harassed, prefer inaction;

WHEREAS the law and order situation in the country as well as the economy have been adversely affected and trichotomy of powers eroded;

WHEREAS a situation has thus arisen where the government of the country cannot be carried on in accordance with the Constitution and as the Constitution provides no solution for this situation, there is no way out except through emergent and extraordinary measures;

AND WHEREAS the situation has been reviewed in meetings with the prime minister, governors of all four provinces, and with Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, Chiefs of the Armed Forces, Vice-Chief of Army Staff and Corps Commanders of the Pakistan Army; NOW, THEREFORE, in pursuance of the deliberations and decisions of the said meetings, I, General Pervez Musharraf, Chief of the Army Staff, proclaim Emergency throughout Pakistan.

2. I, hereby, order and proclaim that the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan shall remain in abeyance.

This Proclamation shall come into force at once.”

We’re going to have great fun now for there is no way they can try Musharraf for treason for the 2007 emergency and second PCO and not for the 1999 countercoup and first PCO, for if the former had not been legitimized by the Supreme Court the 2007 emergency couldn’t have happened. You cannot legitimately ‘subvert’ the constitution in one instance and not in another. Subversion is subversion. What you have to determine is which subversion is greater, subversion of the constitution or of the state? The constitution is not the state, it is the state’s basic law begs for change when it itself subverts the state by its hypocrisy and contradictions.

Now many generals, including the current chief, judges, including the current chief justice, politicians, bureaucrats and others are going to be in the dock with Musharraf because they “aided, abetted and collaborated” with him in ‘subverting’ the constitution in 1999 and 2007. It’s going to be high drama Broadway style.

To say that they will try him for treason for the second emergency and PCO but not the actual army intervention and the first PCO is an insult to our intelligence. How can the same act be a ‘crime’ in the second instance but not the first? Or is it all about jobs: is it legal if our jobs are secure but illegal if they are not? Is that why the judges who secured their jobs after taking oath on the first PCO are pristine while those who took oaths under the second PCO are not? Is not every PCO the same as far as ‘subversion’ is concerned? I am amazed that people cannot see through such double standards.

The Clause 2A of Article 6 says that, “An act of high treason…cannot be validated by any court including the Supreme Court and a High Court.” This makes it incumbent upon them to include all those judges of the Supreme Court and those who followed them as potential traitors for aiding, abetting and collaborating with Musharraf in the 2007 emergency. Justice will be incomplete if they too are not tried with Musharraf. The dock shall be lonely; the guillotine still, for Robespierre’s head could be on the block too.

The Supreme Court can only determine guilt or otherwise. Punishment, if any, can only be determined by parliament. So it is imperative that parliament be in place on time.

The high treason act says that, “No court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under this act except upon a complaint in writing made by a person authorized by the Federal Government in this behalf.” No complaint has been made by the federal government so what is the Supreme Court going on about? They are not even competent to ask (order?) the federal government to make a complaint. They should throw out the petition if and until the federal government does so. Else it will go down in history as gross vindictiveness. -

See more at: High treason or high drama | Pakistan Today | Latest news | Breaking news | Pakistan News | World news | Business | Sport and Multimedia

 

[RazPaK]

Wow Mr. Haq.

Is that you that is speaking on the left?

 

[A1Kaid]

The treason is because he compromised Pakistan sovereignty, allowed foreign actors onto Pakistani soil and harmed Pakistan's security. The economic argument is pathetic, much of that should be credited to PM Shaukat Aziz for the economic improvement.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Musharaf should be made example of, he should be hanged so that no general in future can dream of disturbing democracy in pakistan. A fauji place is in barraks.

 

[razgriz19]

The treason is because he compromised Pakistan sovereignty, allowed foreign actors onto Pakistani soil and harmed Pakistan's security. The economic argument is pathetic, much of that should be credited to PM Shaukat Aziz for the economic improvement.

And who brought Shaukat Aziz?

Pakistan's security was in deep **** since the day we took refugees from Afghanistan. Was that Musharraf? NO
He did a lot more good to the country than harmed it.

And about foreign forces, no one can prevent them from infiltrating our borders. US has CIA operatives even in England.
The only thing we can do is to monitor them and limit their activities which, by the way, MUSHARRAF DID!

Look what's happening now?

**** was going on during his time, BUT it wasn't as severe as what's happening today.

 

[Cherokee]

The Economic Growth part by Mush was Highly Exaggerated as noted by many Pakistani Critics .

Musharraf’s creative national accountants messed up the data to such an extent that now they themselves cannot read it properly. Fiscal year 2003-04; 2004-05, in which they achieved “historic GDP growth and poverty reduction”; and 2005-06 are full of idiosyncratic numbers. For instance, GDP growth in 2003-04 was an impressive 7.5 per cent. It was based on a more than doubling of growth in large scale manufacturing (18.1 per cent) in a single year! This was despite the fact that real total fixed investment declined by six per cent and investment in large-scale manufacturing by 4.6 per cent. With a decline of 2.2 percentage points of GDP in total fixed investment, growth could have come only from consumption! A Nobel Prize should have been awarded for this innovative formula of growth without investment. But wait, 2003-04 was adjusted to correct the base for the master stroke in 2004-05 when GDP growth resulting from creative accounting was shooting through the roof and into double digits. It was contained to nine per cent with great difficulty by showing a 13.5 per cent real increase in total fixed investment. Gross investment was jacked up by increasing, without any basis, the value of stocks by 7.3 per cent in real terms. Stocks do not change so rapidly. In 2003-07, this was changed with impunity.

Read more here : Read more here : [url=http://tribune.com.pk/story/289706/the-road-to-growth/]The road to growth – The Express Tribune[/QUOTE][/URL]

This Mirage of Economic Growth has duped many people .

 

[A1Kaid]

And who brought Shaukat Aziz?

Pakistan's security was in deep **** since the we took refugees from Afghanistan. Was that Musharraf? NO
He did a lot more good to the country than harmed.

A lot happened under Musharraf's administration. His administration achieved a lot economically, but he ultimately compromised Pakistan's sovereignty: you cannot put a price on sovereignty. Doesn't matter at this point how his administrations economic policies were beneficial for the country. I acknowledge his administration Pakistan's averaged 7% GDP growth rate per year, Pakistan was making its IMF payments, received a boost in credit rating, he ushered in Gwadar port, etc. In spite of that he did many things which I won't discuss here that have undermined Pakistan. Should he be charged with treason let the Supreme Court decide I don't want to make that decision; I want to like Musharraf but I can't.

 

[razgriz19]

A lot happened under Musharraf's administration. His administration achieved a lot economically, but he ultimately compromised Pakistan's sovereignty: you cannot put a price on sovereignty. Doesn't matter at this point how his administrations economic policies were beneficial for the country. I acknowledge his administration Pakistan's averaged 7% GDP growth rate per year, Pakistan was making its IMF payments, received a boost in credit rating, he ushered in Gwadar port, etc. In spite of that he did many things which I won't discuss here that have undermined Pakistan. Should he be charged with treason let the Supreme Court decide I don't want to make that decision; I want to like Musharraf but I can't.

Fair enough.
I was just making a point.

 

[BATMAN]

The treason is because he compromised Pakistan sovereignty, allowed foreign actors onto Pakistani soil and harmed Pakistan's security. The economic argument is pathetic, much of that should be credited to PM Shaukat Aziz for the economic improvement.

If so... than go try him for the right crime.

Telling public that we are trying him for some thing but in actual he is being tried for different reasons.

Zardari (saint)... who restored the $cumbag Iftikhar ch. (a.k.a savior of TTP) shall also be tried for allowing Indian troops in Pakistan.

 

[A1Kaid]

The Economic Growth part by Mush was Highly Exaggerated as noted by many Pakistani Critics .




Read more here : Read more here : [url=http://tribune.com.pk/story/289706/the-road-to-growth/]The road to growth – The Express Tribune

[/URL]

This Mirage of Economic Growth has duped many people .[/QUOTE]



Where does the writer get his source or information from? How does he know Musharraf's national accountants "messed up the data". It's not like this man is privy to such information, he seems more like a political dissident than an economist to me.

 

[A1Kaid]

If so... than go try him for the right crime.

Telling public that we are trying him for some thing but in actual he is being tried for different reasons.

Zardari (saint)... who restored the $cumbag Iftikhar ch. (a.k.a savior of TTP) shall also be tried for allowing Indian troops in Pakistan.

I support a bloody purging in Pakistan's top governance.

 

[BATMAN]

I support a bloody purging in Pakistan's top governance.

OK.. but whatever happened to your argument of allowing foreign actors?

Truth is hypocrites are publicly telling that Musharraf is being tried for allowing Americans to invade Afghanistan.

While same hypocrites, hate Pashtoons due to religious bigotry and also do not tell that own master India, allowed his troops, logistics and money to invade Afghanistan.

Same hypocrites do not tell that Americans are welcomed in Afghanistan by war lords of NA.

 

[RiazHaq]

The Economic Growth part by Mush was Highly Exaggerated as noted by many Pakistani Critics .




Read more here : Read more here : [url=http://tribune.com.pk/story/289706/the-road-to-growth/]The road to growth – The Express Tribune

[/URL]


Instead of quoting dubious sources and Pakistani newspaper articles, let's look at the independent sources of data like UNDP, WB and IMF and the Economist magazine's assessments which are more reliable.

(1) Pakistan's HDI grew an average rate of 2.7% per year under President Musharraf from 2000 to 2007, and then its pace slowed to 0.7% per year in 2008 to 2012 under elected politicians, according to the 2013 Human Development Report titled “The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World”. Going further back to the decade of 1990s when the civilian leadership of the country alternated between PML (N) and PPP, the increase in Pakistan's HDI was 9.3% from 1990 to 2000, less than half of the HDI gain of 18.9% on Musharraf's watch from 2000 to 2007.

(2) In an IMF MOU document in 2008, the PPP government hailed the performance of Pakistan's economy under President Musharraf's watch as follows: "Pakistan's economy witnessed a major economic transformation in the last decade. The country's real GDP increased from $60 billion to $170 billion, with per capita income rising from under $500 to over $1000 during 2000-07". It further acknowledged that "the volume of international trade increased from $20 billion to nearly $60 billion. The improved macroeconomic performance enabled Pakistan to re-enter the international capital markets in the mid-2000s. Large capital inflows financed the current account deficit and contributed to an increase in gross official reserves to $14.3 billion at end-June 2007. Buoyant output growth, low inflation, and the government's social policies contributed to a reduction in poverty and improvement in many social indicators". (see MEFP, November 20, 2008, Para 1)

(3) Summing up the economic situation,the Economist magazine in its June 12, 2008 issue said as follows:" (The current) macroeconomic disarray will be familiar to the coalition government led by the Pakistan People's Party of Asif Zardari, and to Nawaz Sharif, whose party provides it “outside support”. Before Mr Sharif was ousted in 1999, the two parties had presided over a decade of corruption and mismanagement. But since then, as the IMF remarked in a report in January, there has been a transformation. Pakistan attracted over $5 billion in foreign direct investment in the 2006-07 fiscal year, ten times the figure of 2000-01. The government's debt fell from 68% of GDP in 2003-04 to less than 55% in 2006-07, and its foreign-exchange reserves reached $16.4 billion as recently as in October." Please read "Pakistani Economy Returning to the Bad Old Days".

Haq's Musings: Musharraf's Economic Legacy

 

[Jango]

The lawyer of Musharraf has been advocating the same thing, that along with Musharraf, the COAS, judges, alot of generals and politicians will be found guilty...it is a pandora box.

The OP also validly points out that the 1999 PCO would also get the judiciary in trouble and hence that case is not being pursued. Double standards?