Musharraf's options reduced amid political turmoil

By Naveed Ahmad (05/16/2007 issue of the CACI Analyst, John's Hopkins University, Washington DC)

http://www.cacianalyst.org/newsite/?q=node/4613

Until early March 2007, General Pervez Musharraf looked determined to win another presidential term smoothly while attaining a majority in parliament after the 2007 elections. However, his March 9 decision to remove the chief justice of Supreme Court, Iftikhar Chaudhry, changed matters. Since October 9, 1999, none has stood his ground as firmly against the military ruler as did Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. Not only does he refuse to step down, but also seeks an open trial. His defiance to the President has won Justice Iftikhar unprecedented street support in Pakistan.

Background: Like ´preceding Pakistani military rulers, General Musharraf has expressed his desire to “continue serving the country as president for another four-year term”. By striking a deal with Islamist parties – the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal - to resign his position as army chief by December 2004, General Musharraf won a rare Parliamentary approval for his presidency. Earlier, Pakistan’s Supreme Court had validated his military coup, applying the ‘doctrine of necessity’. Though several judges preferred to resign over legalizing Musharraf’s military rule, now defiant Justice Ifitkhar Chaudhry had no objections.

Since assuming the chief justice’s office, Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry has, by far, been the harbinger of judicial activism in the country through his frequent suo moto actions on issues concerning the downtrodden people of the country. Justice Chaudhry’s in-court observations and verdicts against government policies alarmed the Musharraf camp while newspapers and political analysts lauded his defiance. Among other, he reversed a shady privatization deal for the country’s massive steel mill, and embarrassed military intelligence agencies by questioning them about the whereabouts of missing citizens.

On March 9, Chief Justice Chaudhry was charged with ‘misconduct’ and ‘misuse of authority’ by General Musharraf, and a reference was sent to the Supreme Judicial Council for a decision. Another senior judge was hurriedly sworn in as the acting chief justice.
The charge against Justice Chaudhry is based primarily on a letter by television personality and Supreme Court advocate Naeem Bokhari, who accused Chaudhry of announcing decisions in court and then giving an opposite decision in the written judgment, insulting and intimidating lawyers, insisting on ostentatious protocol and using expensive cars and airplanes, as well as influencing decision-makers to help his son make his career in the bureaucracy without due merit.

Before serving the reference on the chief justice, Musharraf summoned him at his official army chief residence to demand his resignation. Justice Chaudhry was stopped from leaving for home and kept in custody hours upon his refusal to quit.

As the news hit the electronic and print media, the legal fraternity and the public both reacted angrily towards Musharraf. The Supreme Court has not only stopped the inquiry tribunal from hearing the questionable reference, but also sought reviews into the legality of the charges and a host of issues concerning constitutionality of the proceedings. Now, the chief justice receives elaborate welcome receptions as he visits the country to address the bar associations to mark the 50th anniversary of Supreme Court.

Implications: Much has changed on the nation’s political horizon since the March 9 reference. Musharraf suffers a serious loss of credibility and respect within the ruling coalition. Whether it is a court of law or a TV talk show, the government is at pains getting lawyers as well as commentators to defend its case.

Though the reference against Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry remains sub judice, the government is already facing its fallout. Lawyers have united behind the chief justice, showcasing him as the symbol of rule of law and independence of the judiciary. The media has supported him as well. Last but not the least, it appears that the public is reacting seriously for the first time in the past eight years. Meanwhile, Musharraf and his key allied party – the Pakistan Muslim League (Q) – twice attempted to show street power but with little success.

The Muttahida Qaumi Movement, an ethno-political but militant party comprising Mohajirs (Urdu-speaking migrants from India) resorted to violence in a bid to stop activists of other political parties from expressing solidarity with the chief justice on his visit to Karachi last week. At least 46 people were killed in the violence, while the provincial government and law enforcing authorities watched it happen from the sidelines.

As vocal protests and rallies against the Musharraf regime continue outside the Supreme Court and elsewhere in the country, signs of his weakening are abundantly clear. Musharraf is faced with a gigantic challenge to keep the ruling alliance intact. The biggest challenge for the general is to keep his prime support base – corps commanders and other army generals – fully behind him. Speculations are rife that Musharraf’s handling of the Chief Justice affair has earned him opposition also within the army ranks. The judicial crisis also pulled the political parties out of their isolation, bringing them back in contact with the people ahead of elections due in November 2007.

Shifting political stands bring to surface the most worrisome question for Islamabad as well as its allies: the future of war on terror. It is unlikely that either of the two mainstream political parties, i.e. Benazir Bhutto’s Peoples’ Party and Nawaz Sharif’s Muslim League, would drastically change Islamabad’s policy against extremism and the Taliban if voted to power. However, any regime change and resulting rethinking of policy at this point in time could cost not only Pakistan dearly but also affect the United States and NATO’s role in Afghanistan.

Conclusions: Predominantly, political analysts find little room for Musharraf in the next political dispensation. Even some senior cabinet members have been asking for the withdrawal of the reference against the Chief Justice in a bid to control the damage. The trigger effect has already united the nation’s divided legal fraternity as well as the fractured opposition leadership, some of whom were close to striking a deal with the military regime. Faced with a deficit of options, Musharraf is struggling to muster some public confidence as well as regain his slipping grip over the situation. The more he acts, the deeper he gets into the marshy politico-legal affairs of the state. So far, he has made profusely clear his intention of not withdrawing the controversial reference. With Musharraf’s eight-year rule and centralized decision-making on the one hand, and a fuming legal fraternity and excited political activists on the other, Pakistan could be headed for a violent showdown over the next few months. The time is near when Musharraf may have to bargain his army chief office to strike a deal with the liberal-minded Peoples’ Party, for example; or leave the nation at the mercy of political unrest, shutting the door on democratic forces and leaving the war against terror unfinished.

Author's Bio: Naveed Ahmad is an investigative journalist, whose work regularly appears on the TV channel Geo News and stories are published in The News, and the monthly magazine, Newsline. He frequently reports for American and other western newspapers on South Asian security, energy and politics.