Newspaper Articles

If Zardari must hang – by Harris Bin Munawar

 

Originally Posted at: Pakistan Today

Top leaders of Pakistan Army decided in a meeting last week that they would make no compromises on ‘national security’, and according to reports, also promised to provide protection to Mansoor Ijaz – the man who said the army “breeds hatred among Pakistan’s Islamist masses and then uses their thirst for jihad against Pakistan’s neighbours and allies to sate its hunger for power”.

Mansoor Ijaz may come to Pakistan to testify against former ambassador Husain Haqqani.

It is not clear if Haqqani collaborated with Ijaz to write a controversial memo asking the US to depose Pakistan’s top military leaders, but his travel documents have reportedly been confiscated, he is not allowed to leave the country, he is hiding in the Prime Minister’s House because he fears for his life, and he will likely be charged with treason. But it is clear that Mansoor Ijaz did write the memo. It is ironic that he has been promised security by the very army he had asked the US to act against. If the memo was a conspiracy against Pakistan, why is army supporting one of the conspirators? What are the legal implications of such a move?

It is not clear whether Husain Haqqani violated any regulations, but he was summoned, questioned, and made to resign before the probe began although he was in no position to influence the probe.

But it is clear the ISI chief did not inform the prime minister before or after he met Mansoor Ijaz, although he is required to report to him. He was not made to resign, although he is in a position of influence. When the prime minister made statements that the military must follow the constitution, the army warned of “grievous consequences” through a press release.

Apparently, Shahbaz Sharif was more upset about the statement than the military itself. His elder brother Nawaz Sharif, one of Pakistan’s top politicians, has taken the issue to the Supreme Court doing exactly what the army had wanted him to do. Earlier, he had said in public meetings that the ISI was supporting his rival Imran Khan.

The government is fighting with both the judiciary and the military, and it must go, a key leader from his party said in a TV debate. When his opponent reminded him his own party’s government had fought with the judiciary and the military before it was deposed in 1999, he admitted it was a mistake. Nawaz Sharif and his party had also made appeals to the US to support his government against the military. Some of the judges who had given a legal cover to the 1999 coup are still part of the Supreme Court. The top court of Pakistan took up the memo case before several other matters of public interest as they too vowed to protect ‘national security’.

Haqqani’s lawyer Asma Jahangir said the court gave the petitioners relief more than they had asked for, and decided that ‘national security’ was more important than her client’s fundamental rights.

“I am also a parent and a citizen of this country and feel concerned,” Justice Jawad S Khwaja said in a comment during the hearing. But judges do not show similar concern in the ongoing cases in which ISI is accused of breaking rules, such as picking people up without due process, or funding conservative political parties in elections against the PPP.

The judges did not even show concern when the military promised to protect Mansoor Ijaz, the man who admits he wrote the memo that could jeopardise Pakistan’s ‘national security’.

Meanwhile, Imran Khan has promised to rally towards Islamabad and topple the government that the people of Pakistan had elected for five years. Most of the political leaders he will be flanked with were part of the previous military regime and have recently left the party believed to be backed by the military establishment. They will try to usurp power from a legitimate civilian government that includes leaders who opposed them when they were in power with a uniformed president.

President Zardari has been in jail for about a decade over charges of corruption of which none was proven. The people who had made those cases later admitted they were made under pressure from the military establishment.

If everybody else’s actions are past and closed transactions, why must Zardari hang? And if Zardari must hang, everyone must hang.

The writer is a media and culture critic and works at The Friday Times.He tweets @paagalinsaan and gets email at harris@nyu.edu

About the author

Farhad Jarral

5 Comments

Click here to post a comment
  • I am against the death penalty, in principle. Yet how one wishes that Article Six of the Constitution is fully implemented in its true letter and spirit. For once, at least!

    1. The three military dictators who are dead and gone, along with the relevant corps commanders, must be given a long overdue public hanging. SYMBOLICALLY, at least. It should be done under the supervision of the army and judiciary, the two institutions mainly responsible for this High Treason. And should be televised live from the Constitution Avenue on 23rd March 2012. The three dictators should be officially declared Traitors to the cause of Pakistan, all their rewards\decorations annulled, their properties confiscated with textbooks and relevant official records amended accordingly.

    2. Ditto or mutatis mutandis for the incriminating deceased CJP’s and relevant SC judges (including the textbooks and relevant official records).

    3. Now for the one Dictator still living and who mercifully could not be elected “ten times in his uniform” along with the relevant corps commanders. Given the sane and pragmatic political strategy of Reconciliation and in the interest of the country’s future, the Parliament should give Gen Musharraf two options: a) voluntarily give up all rewards\decorations and benefits thereof, @ the pension equivalent to the salary of a 2nd Lieutenant, or b) face solitary confinement for life but at home at the minimum subsistence level of a non-commissioned officer. Textbooks and official records to be amended accordingly.

    4. Ditto\mutatis mutandis,for the living incriminating CJP’s and relevant SC judges. Read AD&SJ for 2nd-Lt. This includes Mr Justice (R) Nasim Hassan Shah.

    5. Now for the politicians. Again in view of the sane and pragmatic political strategy of Reconciliation, in the interest of the country’s future and, critically, to restore the often trampled civilian supremacy, it should be made compulsory\mandatory for all political parties to include in their manifestoes, as Foreword, the following: <>

    If the armed forces, the higher judiciary and the parliament don’t possess or cannot show enough moral courage to do as above in totality, they should better spare the whole nation of their devious behind-the-scenes machinations and let the present dispensation continue until their constitutional tenure expires March 2013.

    For 64 fateful years, this nation has endured one farcical revolution after another. The 180million hapless Pakistanis can certainly wait for another 12 months to witness the newest version of another thinly disguised, establishment inspired revolution.
    So, before anyone thinks of further tightening the noose around the incumbent President Asif Ali Zardari, democratically elected with two-thirds majority, or if anyone wants to experiment with yet another supra or extra constitutional intervention, he or “they” should better think once again. This is 21st century and even if the 24\7 media portrays otherwise, awaam ko sab kuchh dikhta hai!

  • The missing text after “as Foreword, the following” is as follows:

    The [name of political party] publicly apologizes to the sovereign people of Pakistan on behalf of any of its deceased or living leader, senator, MNA, MPA or worker who may have collaborated with Pakistan’s four military dictators namely Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Ziaul Haque and Pervaiz Musharraf, in any way whatsoever; our Party further pledges never ever to do so again nor to accept in our fold any person who may commit this crime.