01.02.2014 Obstacle for Musharraf
THE gambit has failed: former military strongman Pervez Musharraf will not be jetting out of Pakistan anytime soon — at least on the medical grounds he claims necessitate his treatment abroad. In rejecting Mr Musharraf’s plea, the special court has done the right and obvious thing, both legally and medically. In essence, the team of army doctors who examined Mr Musharraf and submitted their report to the court had suggested that while Mr Musharraf does need further medical treatment, the real problem was the lack of faith the former president had in Pakistani facilities — and not that the facilities themselves were inadequate. From there it was a fairly easy step to rejecting the request for treatment abroad — though, as events have already proved, there is nothing easy about trying a former army chief for suspending the Constitution.
Medically, it is certainly possible that given his age and the stress of his present predicament, Mr Musharraf could still require treatment that can only be provided abroad. If those conditions do arise and are verified by an independent team of medical experts, the court could, and should, consider a fresh request from the Musharraf team at that point. Short of that, however, the only logical path for Mr Musharraf is clear: he should go to court, defend himself against the charges as best he sees fit and leave the process to decide his fate. There is certainly no evidence at all to date that the process of Mr Musharraf’s trial is in any way compromised, non-transparent or in contravention of due process. That also holds true for the other rights he is entitled to. That the former dictator may be unwilling to accept his crimes against the Constitution is not of much relevance or consequence here.
In truth, the window of opportunity for a Musharraf trial is a limited one — as the government privately acknowledges. Had, for example, a military operation been announced by the prime minister on Monday instead of another attempt at talks with the TTP, the Musharraf trial would have been politically dead in the water. For with Mr Musharraf seemingly determined to drag the army as an institution into the issue of his treason trial, it would have been difficult for the government to simultaneously have soldiers being injured or killed in combat while their former chief was being put on trial for treason. That is just the nature of the public-relations game — one the government has no real ability to shape otherwise. So it is good that the court is showing some urgency in pressing ahead. The bailable warrant for Mr Musharraf’s arrest is fairly standard procedure for a defendant who refuses to come to court. Mr Musharraf should go to court on Feb 7.
‘Centralised’ central bank
FOR a party avowedly committed to modernising the system, the PML-N frequently does something or the other that betrays an irrepressible urge to control and centralise. Even before the recent resignation of the governor of the State Bank of Pakistan, the Nawaz Sharif set-up had problems sharing authority with many top-ranking government officials. In fact, the SBP governor’s exit was perhaps inevitable, given the government’s impatience to find a quick fix for the economy. This hasty approach is reflected strongly in Finance Minister Ishaq Dar’s animated pledges. As SBP governor Yaseen Anwar departs, Mr Dar will find it hard to deny a role in the episode. However, it’s likely that the minister will ignore the criticism and that he will want an ally in the bank who not only shares his vision but also agrees with his methods and is ready to toe the government’s line.
The federal government, it seems, has one size to fit all — be it the passing of the controversial and dangerous Protection of Pakistan Ordinance or making tough economic decisions. Extraordinary circumstances demand extraordinary measures, is the message. Thus, niceties about institution-building and respect for mandates are matters it deems can be put off for better times. Unfortunately, this is the latest doctrine of necessity Pakistanis must bear with. To be fair, the doctrine has also been used by previous governments which asserted their ‘right’ to have the right people in the right posts in order to be steered away from their own extraordinary circumstances. In the span of a few years, Mr Anwar is the third SBP governor to be forced out over differences with the government. Since promises of a turnaround accompanying these ousters did not materialise, it would be worthwhile to shift the focus from individuals to policies. One policy should be to give freedom to institutions such as the SBP. They must be allowed to evolve into autonomous entities that can decide independently and efficiently without fear of their chiefs being vetoed and thrown out by the government. That may be a long route out of the mess but is undeniably a more secure one.
Imran Farooq murder probe
IN an emotional statement on Thursday, MQM chief Altaf Hussain spoke out against the “false allegations” and “negative propaganda” being spread about him, advising party cadres to foil the “conspiracy”. The MQM supremo’s comments appear to have been prompted by a recent BBC report, broadcast in the UK, in which two suspects believed to be involved in Muttahida leader Dr Imran Farooq’s 2010 murder in London have been named. Also on Thursday, the MQM held a press conference in Karachi in which party leaders slammed the UK broadcaster’s programme, saying that the suspects had no links with the Muttahida. The party has been claiming that London’s Metropolitan Police was “harassing” Altaf Hussain. The London-based MQM leader has reportedly been questioned by British authorities in a number of cases, including Dr Farooq’s murder probe as well as a money-laundering investigation. It is not known what the exact nature of the alleged harassment of the MQM leader is. But if the Met is indeed badgering Mr Hussain in a fashion beyond what the law permits, that is unacceptable and the MQM chief could take up the matter in a UK court.
At the same time, while the party’s well within its rights to criticise the BBC programme if it doesn’t agree with the latter’s content, our understanding is that all the show did was to name the suspects in Dr Farooq’s murder case. Nowhere was it said that these individuals were MQM activists. If the Muttahida is interested in unveiling Dr Farooq’s killers — as the party insists it is — then it should welcome any breakthrough in the investigation. After all, Dr Farooq was amongst the MQM’s top-tier leaders. His brutal murder has been seen as a conspiracy against the MQM and the party should fully support the British authorities in unravelling this mystery. The investigation must continue till it reaches its logical conclusion; while the MQM’s concerns about the harassment of its leader should be addressed, the focus must remain on bringing Dr Farooq’s killers to justice.