After the July 31 historic judgement of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the political environment of the country, has suddenly heated upto a boiling point. The Supreme Judicial Council is in session to take stock of the simmering state of the higher judiciary including the apex court and the high courts of the four provinces where more than six score judges have been sacked on grounds of having taken oath under PCO and nearly three dozen judges appointed by former CJ Dogar. All five judges of the Balochistan High Court resigned and sought premature retirement creating, what could develop into a judicial crisis in Balochistan, but was averted by the timely appointment of an eminent local advocate as CJ. This has plugged the judicial crisis for the time being in Balochistan. However, the uneasy situation persists on the national horizon as more than 70 sacked judges have declared their resolve to move petitions in the higher judiciary. Moreover, the eruption of violence at many places by a section of the lawyers community against judges, police and journalist, has clearly signalled 'trouble' from quarters not yet identified. One thing is certain, some hidden hands are feverishly engaged in driving a wedge between not only the different groups of the Bar but also between the Bench and the Bar, on the one hand. And between the lawyers community at large and the civil society, choosing the media as the priority target. The implications of this division amongst different sectors of the civil society, already politically divided, are quite obvious. At this critical juncture when a storm is gathering on the national horizon, after the Supreme Court's historic judgement of July 31, throwing the ball into the court of the Parliament to deal with the infamous 17th Amendment, the fate of NRO and Musharraf. The full court meeting chaired last week by the honourable CJ coupled with the Larger Bench judgement spelling out state-of-the-art purge of the higher judiciary, had urged the other organs of the State to follow suit in a unique pattern of accountability within each organ including national issues needing urgent attention of the Parliament according to the hopes and expirations of the people of Pakistan as expressed during the general elections held in February 2008. I may not be far wrong if I assumed that the Parliament is cornered. My Lord the Chief Justice of Pakistan throw the ball in the court of the Parliament to take action against Musharraf. However, the PML-N picked up the gauntlet. Nawaz Sharif wasted no time to lay down the party line. The leader of the Opposition Chaudhry Nisar Ali also gave the clarion call on the floor of the National Assembly on Wednesday August 5, 2009, the bottomline of which was "put Musharraf on trial for violation of the constitution." PM Gilani was faced with the worst riddle of his life. He came out with a good a solution of the bad situation when he said: "The government would support the unanimous resolution for Musharraf's trial under Article 6 of the constitution." A day earlier the Attorney-General of Pakistan had declared that "there was no constitutional hitch in trying Musharraf which could be done with a simple majority vote of the National Assembly." May be Mr Khosa did not anticipate the sudden onslaught of Chaudhry Nisar, but the PM saved the situation at least for the time being by quickly utilising the age old mantra of the Hindu sages Na naun mann tale ho ga na rahda nachey gee (Radha is not likely to undertake the promised dance in the absence of the host making available nine maunds of the promised oil, a pre-requisite for the dance). Neither the opposition leader is likely to produce a unanimous Resolution of the House, nor would the ruling party face the consequent embarrassment. Why, in the first place, the leader of the opposition, should take upon himself the responsibility of moving a unanimous resolution? Whose brainchild, is this strange riddle, I wonder? The writer is the president of the Pakistan National Forum