MUCH has been said about the trial of Gen (r) Pervez Musharraf, especially after the recent verdict of the Supreme Court asking the former president to defend his actions of Nov 3, 2007.

It appears there is no one around to defend Mr Musharraf this time. Seems like the name 'Musharraf' has become a taboo.

Whatever the case, I am not here to defend what Mr Musharraf did.

The point I want to make is what happened to people who supported him in his hay days. Where have they taken refuge?

The so-called representatives of people are finding means to evade the topic they loved so dearly in the past, whenever approached.

Such is the hollowness of our politicians who change colours like chameleon.

The media, on its own part, seems biased to me. The element of partiality should not be present in the representatives of the media at least.

The must not open themselves to any prejudice whatsoever.

This is something I have been observing while watching different talk shows on different channels.

Lastly, I strongly believe that the legal mess created by Musharraf needs to be cleared out.

It is a delicate matter and hence need special delicacy and treatment.

This can be achieved by a combined effort. It must be taken into consideration that the panel hearing the case is composed of 14 judges who were all victims of emergency and were affected by the then president once.

Therefore, in order to eradicate any sense of partiality, special actions are inevitable.

The option of 'amici curiae' discussed in July 24's editorial is a welcome proposal and must evaluated at higher levels.

IRFAN ALAM
Sukar Koi Danyore
Gilgit

(II)

IN VIEW of the Supreme Court's notice, will Pervez Musharraf walk his talk and appear before the court to defend and justify his actions of Nov 3, 2007?

Or will feet of clay aid his absence? Interesting and telling times.

M. ALI CHUNDRIGAR
Islamabad