International   

A unique challenge posed to Musharraf

ISLAMABAD: Among the 10 petitioners in the Supreme Court seeking to prevent President Pervez Musharraf from contesting for another term while holding two government offices, one has sought to pose the challenge in a unique way.

Anwar ul Haque was the head of pathology at the government-run Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences when he decided he would run for President too.

“I wrote to the Election Commission asking for guidance, saying that I am a government servant and that I be given permission and asking for the nomination forms,” said Dr. Haque.

The very next day, he was transferred to an administrative post in the Health Ministry. Dr. Haque believes it was a punitive transfer.

He has asked the court to disqualify Gen. Musharraf from contesting the presidential election, or permit him to contest it.

“I am not a politician. I don’t have any political affiliation and I don’t want to become President. What I want the Supreme Court to say is that neither [Gen. Musharraf] nor I are qualified to become President. That would be the right way. Otherwise I should be allowed to contest,” said Dr. Haque, who is at the court every day for the hearings of the petitions. The challenge exemplifies an argument that lawyers for the petitioners have forwarded during the course of the hearings.

They have said that a 2004 Act that enables the President to hold two offices — passed by Parliament weeks before the disqualification provision in the Constitution was to become applicable again — is discriminatory. It was made for one person, and not an office, and should therefore be struck down.

“Why this kind of arbitrary law should exist on our books, and make us a laughing stock in the world?” asked senior advocate Hamid Khan, as he argued cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan’s petition on Wednesday. The petitions have prompted the judges to ask why politicians who gave Gen. Musharraf parliamentary backing to hold another office by approving the Amendment, expect the courts to take their chestnuts out of the fire.

It was with the help of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, a right-wing coalition of religious parties, that the Amendment was passed. Of the 10 petitions, one is by the Jamat-e-Islami, a main MMA constituent, and the second by its leader Qazi Hussain Ahmed, who is now against Gen. Musharraf.

“You do everything yourself, and then come to us for solutions,” remarked Justice Falak Sher, as the bench heard Mr. Khan sum up how the Amendment and the 2004 Act came into existence.

But the lawyers too hit back at the judges, telling them that they had a hand in the current constitutional tangle, by giving judgments favourable to Gen. Musharraf.

“The nation demands of your lordships to revisit all the judgment condoning the changes,” said Akram Sheikh on the opening day of the hearings.

Dr. Haque said he had received widespread support. “I am getting so many phone calls. People are telling me, ‘this is a war of principles, and we are with you’,” he said.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

A unique challenge posed to Musharraf
Basil Rajapaksa becomes MP
Kakodkar outlines India’s stand at IAEA meet
Come clean on ties with Iran, U.S. asks India
“Make rights panel work credible”
NC to study republic idea
Army has no political role, says Dhaka
Global hotspots of endangered languages
Khmer Rouge ideologue held
Woman, son jailed for “honour killing”
Gang smuggling Indians busted in Belgium

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu