Posted on April 11, 2014

Now a day, a terminology of “logical conclusion” is being frequently employed in our media. What is a logical conclusion? I simply give its meaning which is “Rational Judgment or Convincing Results.” How to assume that whatever will happen, will it be logical conclusion? Here I open discourse on the Pervez Musharraf case, because as above is mentioned that in our media some ministers and others who belong to PML-n-and company are stressing on term “logical conclusion” of High treason case”.
Pervez Musharraf’s high treason case is in pending in the special court. The special court is constituted in the perspective of Supreme Court order, and it is worth remembering that then chief justice Iftekhar Choudhary, who was himself so called victim of 3rd November 2007 emergency-plus, passed the order against Pervez Musharraf and then he kept on insisting the government to invoke article 6 against Musharraf. What did happen after that? In the result of 11th may 2013, punctured election, Nawaz got majority and became Prime Minister, who was another victim of the 12th October 1999 coup. In obedience to the orders of Supreme Court, the government prayed the Supreme Court to constitute a special court to run the high treason case against Musharraf alone. To find out logical conclusion, I would like to raise questions and then in the light of given answers I shall try to find out whether high treason case will end in logical conclusion or in illogical conclusion.
1. What does article 6 say?
Answer: The article 6 says:
6. High treason. —1 [(1) Any person who abrogates or subverts or suspends or *holds in abeyance, or attempts or conspires to abrogate or subvert or suspend or *hold in abeyance, the Constitution by use of force or show of force or by any other unconstitutional means shall be guilty of high treason.]

(2) Any person aiding or abetting 2 [or collaborating] the acts mentioned in clause (1) shall likewise be guilty of high treason.

3 [(2A) An act of high treason mentioned in clause (1) or clause (2) shall not be validated by any court, including the Supreme Court and a High Court.]

(3) 4 [Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] shall by law provide for the punishment of persons found guilty of high treason.

After reading the complete article6, it is proved that Musharraf cannot be held responsible alone in high treason case.
2. What does constitution say about the initiating time of article 6?

Answer: It is mentioned about the initiating time of article 6 is from 1956. After reveiwing this answer, one must know that government can not initiate High treason case under article 6 but, if government whenever want to launch article 6 then it will be initiated from 1956. It is given in the article 12 sub clause, (2) Nothing in clause (1) or in Article 270 shall apply to any law making acts of abrogation or subversion of a Constitution in force in Pakistan at any time since the twenty-third day of March, one thousand nine hundred and fifty-six, an offence.
3. Who were adders and abettors at the time of imposing emergency:
Answer of this question is mentioned in the promulgation order. I shall give only the paragraph which is related to my topic:
“ AND WHEREAS the situation has been reviewed in meetings with the prime minister, governors of all four provinces, and with Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, Chiefs of the Armed Forces, Vice-Chief of Army Staff and Corps Commanders of the Pakistan Army; NOW, THEREFORE, in pursuance of the deliberations and decisions of the said meetings, I, General Pervez Musharraf, Chief of the Army Staff, proclaim Emergency throughout Pakistan.
I, hereby, order and proclaim that the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan shall remain in abeyance.
In the light of above paragraph, it is proved that all competent persons who were holding highest positions were on the same page with Musharraf, hence, without bringing them in the fold of high treason case, it will not produce logical conclusion.

4. What is the procedure to constitute special court as per law?
Answer: As far as my knowledge is concerned, It is discretion of the federal government to file the FIR of high treason case under article 6. We observed in this case that the Supreme Court prompted the government to invoke article 6 and how can Supreme Court insist for such case which does not fall in its own domain. Answer of the third question also goes against the logical conclusion of the case.
Concluding the discourse it is proved that whole process which is adopted shall not be logical conclusion but it will be the worst example of illogical conclusion in the history of Pakistan. It is also an important thing, that even either high treason case proved against Musharraf or not proved, it will be illogical conclusion because basic requirements are not fulfilled in this case. So government should revisit the whole process to get the goal of establishing the rule of law in the country. These are my logical findings by reviewing and studying the related articles taken from the constitution of Pakistan, the government is authorize to invoke article 6, but it must be applied whole from all aspects to set a historical example in the history of Pakistan, otherwise pick and choose will bring destructive consequences and I will go one step forward that these destructive consequences may be irremediable in the near future of Pakistan.