Someone it seems, must have slandered Joseph K, for one fine morning he was arrested.” Musharraf is under, what Franz Kafka would call a scholarly arrest; one that is very different from the arrests common thieves and the like undergo. The stars though, seem far from aligned in favour of the proceedings. The security threats that cannot be adequately dealt with, dramatic heart problems, the sympathetic turn of a mother’s illness, attorney-drama, the walkout of a judge. It’s all been turning in circles. The only real progress made thus far is his indictment, but then everyone knew what he was going to be charged for.

Stating the obvious and bickering over trivial details has dominated the course of the proceedings. This might be deliberate on the part of Musharraf’s counsel, but the former President of the country would be better placed if he sped things up by making more appearances. The case has inconsistent foundations that he can use to his advantage, and that makes the whole thing sound farcical. His indictment under Article 6 only looks at the treason he supposedly committed, but neglects to try others under the second part of the article which states that accomplices and abettors must also be tried. This would include the army, the civil service, many politicians and all those who did not protest against the emergency and were willing to work under Musharraf’s rule. So what about justice? In this case it’s relative. Whether its justice as a statement against military takeovers, or legitimate channels for a more personal brand of vengeance; either way, it does not seem likely that our protagonist (or antagonist) will be sent to the stocks like the one in Kafka’s most famous novel. He knows his way around the system far too well. And if its delay that’s needed, he will be more than happy to oblige.