- General Musharraf sentenced to death
Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf was found guilty of high treason by a Special Court, and sentenced to death in absentia, becoming the first military dictator to be found guilty of the offence. The decision represents a partial overturning of existing case law, which has validated military takeovers. The sentence will probably not be executed, because General Musharraf is out of the country, and probably will not come back for execution, but the verdict is going to be a stumbling block in the way of future Army Chiefs contemplating a takeover. Previously, it could be argued that military takeovers were not high treason, but service to the nation. Now, there has been a precedent created that it is not, that they are high treason. Though the present case has not had any subordinates impleaded, future attempts at a takeover might well be met by subordinates refusing to do anything that might carry the risk of a death sentence in the future.
The decision might well have come because there was really no other decision that a court could take, as a military takeover is so clearly an act falling within the mischief of Article 6, which had been included in the 1973 Constitution after the experience of the 1958 and 1969 takeovers. It could not stop the 1977 takeover, for which no one has been brought to trial, but now the architect of the 1999 takeover has been made to face what are merely the logical consequences of his act, albeit 20 years later.
The government’s reaction to the verdict can be explained best by the composition of the current federal cabinet. While supposedly the prosecutor in this case, it has acted more in the interest of the defence. It helped in the defence’s last-ditch efforts to prevent the verdict from being announced. PM’s Information Special Assistant Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan has said that the government will study the verdict. Why? The government won the case, so why would it want to do something only done by lawyers planning to appeal. General Musharraf reserves the right to appeal the decision which he surely will.
