ISLAMABAD, July 1: Most of the panelists and participants at a public forum on Monday observed that former military dictator General (retired) Pervez Musharraf should be tried for abrogating the constitution twice.

The event on ‘High treason (punishment) act 1973 and its implications’ was organised by Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (Pildat).

The panelists were of the view that a fair trial would help strengthen democracy and ruled out the possibility of civil-military friction in its aftermath.

While many of the speakers referred to the abettors of the military coup including those holding top judicial and military slots as well as politicians, none of them chose to demand they too should be tried and punished.

Legal and constitutional expert Salman Akram Raja noted that amendment to Article 270AA of the constitution through 18th Constitution Amendment took away the limited protection. He said even in the original text, it was nowhere said that what happened on October 12, 1999 was not an act of treason.

He said it was a peculiar crime which had political implications as well and that was why the law left it for the government to decide if a trial was initiated.

He said when the proceedings got going, it would be seen whether the government kept it as a show-piece trial or went for meaningful proceedings. Replying to a question asked by Lt-Gen (retired) Arif Bangash, former governor of the Khyber Pakhnukhwa (KP), Salman Akram Raja said the government had the right to tell the Supreme Court that it (SC) could not push the government to try General Musharraf.

He was of the opinion that the trial must be free of all pressures and the Apex Court should not oversee it. “When the Supreme Court starts examining a case before the trial, it affects the trial”, he observed.

Former Secretary Defence Production Lt General (retired) Talat Masood said Musharraf decided to come to Pakistan knowing the charges against him. He said he thought he had done nothing wrong and came here to legitimize himself. He also had a misunderstanding about his popularity in the country.

He was of the view that the case should be disposed of as soon as possible and noted that the trial would not negatively impact civil-military relationship. “It would be inappropriate if the Army says the country’s laws were not applicable on it”, he remarked.

He said another approach was that the trial should have been taken up by the government after winning the confidence of the people about its performance as had been done in the case of Turkey.

Political scientist Dr Ejaz Shafi Gilani said there was a consensus that there should be rule of law. He stressed that one should not fall prey to expediency. The case must be proceeded against. He said all including judiciary, armed forces, civil servants and the common citizens should be subservient to the supremacy of law.

Engineer Ali Muhammad Khan, a PTI MNA from Mardan, said one must wash the linen when it gets dirty instead of trying to conceal it. He said Musharraf must be tried for violating the constitution and stressed that his party firmly believed in the rule of law.

Political and defence analyst Dr Hasan Askari Rizvi was the lone voice to differ with the majority view. He was of the opinion that the PML-N should conserve its political energy and focus on serving the people rather than fighting wars of the past. “Let history pass its judgment on Pervez Musharraf”, he remarked.

He noted that the domain of Musharraf case was expected to expand and disturb in more than one ways the delicate civil-military relations. He warned that any disturbance in civil-military relations will be destabilizing.

He recalled that the controversies over Kerry Lugar Bill and the memo issue during the PPP government’s tenure show that if tensions develop between the military and the civil government, the latter faces serious difficulties.