Around 7 pm on June 24, the day our dear Prime Minister announced his dramatic decision to indict PM, i.e. General (retd) Pervez Musharraf, on the charges of high treason, I was stopped short by one of the most illustrious lunatics in our mental institution. He had a blank expression on his face and, interestingly enough, a blank envelope in his hand. “Would you please post this letter for me, Mr Officer?” said he. “Sure, dude. Who do you want to send it to?” I asked curiously. “The Prime Minister,” he replied. “The Prime Minister? Are you sure?” I inquired. “Absolutely. You just post it. Don’t worry about the content. It is harmless. On the safe side, you can open and read it. You can even use it as a material for your next piece. I know you write for the papers at times,” he said, as if he had done his due homework before approaching me. I nodded; duly thanked him and taking the letter from him, I asked to take my leave. Here is the letter copied letter by letter to let the readers know about the innermost thoughts of a layman-turned-lunatic concerning the application of Article 6 in the current state of affairs: “Dear Mr Prime Minister,You took me by surprise today on June 24. You made such a strange move. More of a somersault, I must say. I thought you had forgiven the good general. Well, few weeks back in your election campaign, you just told us so. Didn’t you? ‘I forgive Musharraf for what he did’. Were you kidding us then? Or are you kidding us now? You know I am no diplomat or politician, but only a fool. I take words at face value. Just what happened in the due course to change your view, Mr PM? The cowardly attacks in Quetta killing innocent girl students? The turning into ashes of the historic Quaid-i-Azam Residency in Ziarat? The suicide attack in a funeral procession in Mardan, killing a PTI MPA and scores others? The murder of an MQM MPA in Karachi? The suicide attack in a Shia madrassah in Peshawar? Or the worst terrorist attack in a decade on foreign tourists, in Diamer? All these only within a month of your taking oath as the PM, Mr PM. Naturally, I and my fellow fools expected something else. Something out of the ordinary. A holistic and robust security policy to deal with this nightmarish hell. It appears you got a different take on that. You say it is economics that holds great sway. That once we have a strong economy, we will overcome all other ills. As a businessman, you fail to see both economy and security go hand in hand. No security, no investment. No investment, no business. Simple as that. Just tell me how can one do any business amid bombs, bullets and guns? So what do we make of it? Are we back to the nineties’ politicking? Politics of personal vengeance? Of personal vendetta? Or that it was necessary to make rule of law rule the country? That justice must prevail under any circumstances. That you want to establish a high precedence. That you plan to put a stop to any future coup d'état. Or that you intend to atone for the all the past martial laws. Well, all that sounds so revolutionary a talk. A sweet flowery talk. An idealistic and academic talk, one might say. Would you mind if I rather ask a few cross questions? Was it necessary to go for such an extreme position? Was it vital to take such a radical step? Wouldn’t it establish a dangerous precedence in its own right? Wouldn’t it create more mayhem and riot? Was there no middle course to dodge the bullet? No balanced way? No third option? Don’t you think you are flying tad too high tad too soon, Mr PM? That high treason is a high charge? That it carries with it high risks and high pitfalls? That it will create yet another high drama? That it will cause a high temperature? Apparently, it seems only one Article: Article 6. But there are clauses and sub-clauses that can serve as jinx for your newly-formed government. For the devil always lies in the details. And all this at a time when all we need is a conducive civil-military relationship. When you need the army most. And the army needs you most. I understand you are only following the Supreme Court orders. That you had no choice in the matter. That you tried to buy time. A full month. But that you were denied that and were given only two days. That is, only 48 hours to make such a crucially important decision. Now this one decision thwarts all your recent attempts at national reconciliation, Mr PM. You accepted the PTI majority in the KPK - your worst enemy in the polls. You sacrificed your own party’s majority in the restive Balochistan. You rather gave peace a chance by offering the CM seat and Governorship to the nationalists. So while on the one hand, you try to avoid repeating the past mistakes. On the other, you are just making new ones. Besides, it is also a case of personal ingratitude. You know the same general once bestowed upon you mercy. You were also once charged with a high treason case. Remember? The aircraft hijacking one. You were put behind bars. You were sentenced to life imprisonment. You sought pardon. And you were given. You were even provided a safe exit. It is only a question of perception how you see it then: the much-trumpeted makafat-e-amal, i.e. heavenly retribution or history’s repetition? History will judge the verdict in any case. We have a history of indulging in inconsequential shibboleths. We just fritter away our time and energy. We refuse to come to terms. We wallow in non-issues and turn a blind eye toward the real ones. We wasted almost three years arguing if the President enjoys the privilege of exception or not. We moved to and fro between the two poles. We oscillated between the two positions. Exception. No exception. We sent an elected Prime Minister home. We disqualified him for five years. We wasted millions of the taxpayers money. And only to find in the end that the Swiss courts would not open the cases at all. Huh. You somehow tried to put the ball in the court of the apex court, Mr PM. You say the general will be charged for his November 3 action. And not the October 12 one. Now that is beyond my insane understanding. Methinks that lands you in a paradoxical position. If October 12 is not a high treason act, how come the November 3 is one? If the overthrow of a civilian government by a military man is not an illegal step, how come the detention and house arrest of the judges is one? It is a simple question. But it begs for an answer. So unless you come up with a satisfactory answer, your action against Musharraf would only be interpreted as a case of personal grudges. Of personal qualms. Of personal egotistic designs. That you’d only be following the politics of distraction - trying to divert the public attention from real issues. That you’d merely be going for selective justice. That you’d just be looking for a scapegoat. That you’d only be following the footsteps of your so-called mentor - that mard-e-momin mard-e-haq - who hanged a leader, deemed by some as a democrat and considered by others as a civil martial law administrator.Looking forward to your kind response. Sincerely Yours,Baba Baola Postscript: “Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both” (Eleanor Roosevelt).
The writer is a researcher and a freelance columnist based in Islamabad.