ISLAMABAD:
Four retired federal secretaries and many others can be involved in the
Musharraf high treason case by the defence team for implementing the
dictator’s November 3, 2007 unconstitutional order and are therefore
vulnerable.
The FIA inquiry report into the matter did not find any abettor but talked of “implementers”.As Musharraf’s trial finally takes off after his indictment, which removed many hurdles and hiccups, Musharraf’s defence team will now focus on who did what on November 3, 2007 to complicate the case.
According to sources, though the FIA inquiry report into General Pervez Musharraf’s case under Article 6 of the Constitution did not find any abettor or corroborator on the civilian side, it did say that the then secretary to the president, cabinet secretary, interior secretary, law secretary and others were among the implementers of the unconstitutional order.
Regarding the military side, the FIA team investigating the matter was never allowed to enter the GHQ. The report established one fact that nothing was found from the Presidency, the Prime Minister’s Office, cabinet secretariat, the law ministry and other government offices to establish that they were involved in the preparation of the November 3 order, which was the basis for the abrogation of the Constitution and the unconstitutional and illegal removal of dozens of judges.
On the civilian side, all government officials interviewed as yet by the FIA team have revealed that they were not involved in the preparation of the order but had received it for implementation. The unconstitutional PCO was notified by the secretary cabinet, who was conveyed the said order through the-then secretary to the prime minister.
The-then secretary law and the-then interior secretary got the PCO implemented through the official machinery. Musharraf’s defence team is expected to get the “implementers” involved. However, it is yet to be seen if the VVIP accused would allow his legal team to get the record of the GHQ scanned with the hope that it might help to save his skin.
In his unconstitutional Proclamation of Emergency Order, Musharraf had stated that the situation had been reviewed in meetings with the prime minister, governors of all the four provinces, and with chairman joint chiefs of staff committee, chiefs of the armed forces, vice chief of the army staff and corps commanders of the Pakistan Army, and emergency was proclaimed in pursuance of the deliberations and decisions of the said meetings.....”
Musharraf’s claim about his “consultation” with the civilian government has not been proved from any official record with the civilians. The FIA team wanted to see who in the GHQ and from amongst the-then military commanders had been consulted in preparation of the said order but it could not be done.
The Supreme Court, in its July 31, 2009 judgment, had found Musharraf making a wrong statement in his Proclamation of Emergency Order. The SC had ruled, “The statement made in Proclamation of Emergency that the situation had been reviewed in meetings with the prime minister, governors of all the four provinces, and with chairman, joint chiefs of staff committee, chiefs of the armed forces, vice chief of army staff and corps commanders of the Pakistan Army, and emergency was proclaimed in pursuance of the deliberations and decisions of the said meetings, was incorrect. The Proclamation of Emergency emanated from his person, which was apparent from the words ‘I, General Pervez Musharraf......’ used in it.”
According to the SC ruling, the actions of General Parvez Musharraf dated November 3, 2007 were the result of his apprehensions regarding the decision of Wajihuddin Ahmed’s case and his resultant disqualification to contest the election of president. Therefore, it could not be said that the said actions were taken for the welfare of the people. Clearly, the same were taken by him in his own interest and for illegal and unlawful personal gain of manoeuvring another term in office of president, therefore, the same were mala fide as well.
The FIA inquiry report into the matter did not find any abettor but talked of “implementers”.As Musharraf’s trial finally takes off after his indictment, which removed many hurdles and hiccups, Musharraf’s defence team will now focus on who did what on November 3, 2007 to complicate the case.
According to sources, though the FIA inquiry report into General Pervez Musharraf’s case under Article 6 of the Constitution did not find any abettor or corroborator on the civilian side, it did say that the then secretary to the president, cabinet secretary, interior secretary, law secretary and others were among the implementers of the unconstitutional order.
Regarding the military side, the FIA team investigating the matter was never allowed to enter the GHQ. The report established one fact that nothing was found from the Presidency, the Prime Minister’s Office, cabinet secretariat, the law ministry and other government offices to establish that they were involved in the preparation of the November 3 order, which was the basis for the abrogation of the Constitution and the unconstitutional and illegal removal of dozens of judges.
On the civilian side, all government officials interviewed as yet by the FIA team have revealed that they were not involved in the preparation of the order but had received it for implementation. The unconstitutional PCO was notified by the secretary cabinet, who was conveyed the said order through the-then secretary to the prime minister.
The-then secretary law and the-then interior secretary got the PCO implemented through the official machinery. Musharraf’s defence team is expected to get the “implementers” involved. However, it is yet to be seen if the VVIP accused would allow his legal team to get the record of the GHQ scanned with the hope that it might help to save his skin.
In his unconstitutional Proclamation of Emergency Order, Musharraf had stated that the situation had been reviewed in meetings with the prime minister, governors of all the four provinces, and with chairman joint chiefs of staff committee, chiefs of the armed forces, vice chief of the army staff and corps commanders of the Pakistan Army, and emergency was proclaimed in pursuance of the deliberations and decisions of the said meetings.....”
Musharraf’s claim about his “consultation” with the civilian government has not been proved from any official record with the civilians. The FIA team wanted to see who in the GHQ and from amongst the-then military commanders had been consulted in preparation of the said order but it could not be done.
The Supreme Court, in its July 31, 2009 judgment, had found Musharraf making a wrong statement in his Proclamation of Emergency Order. The SC had ruled, “The statement made in Proclamation of Emergency that the situation had been reviewed in meetings with the prime minister, governors of all the four provinces, and with chairman, joint chiefs of staff committee, chiefs of the armed forces, vice chief of army staff and corps commanders of the Pakistan Army, and emergency was proclaimed in pursuance of the deliberations and decisions of the said meetings, was incorrect. The Proclamation of Emergency emanated from his person, which was apparent from the words ‘I, General Pervez Musharraf......’ used in it.”
According to the SC ruling, the actions of General Parvez Musharraf dated November 3, 2007 were the result of his apprehensions regarding the decision of Wajihuddin Ahmed’s case and his resultant disqualification to contest the election of president. Therefore, it could not be said that the said actions were taken for the welfare of the people. Clearly, the same were taken by him in his own interest and for illegal and unlawful personal gain of manoeuvring another term in office of president, therefore, the same were mala fide as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment