Where is the consistency in justice?
Both the PML-N and PPP are rightly fuming over the permission granted to retired Gen Pervez Musharraf to file his nomination papers by the Supreme Court. What rationale can be given by the SC to allow a former dictator who has absconded in a high treason case to contest elections with assurances that he will not be arrested on his return? There is a palpable irony here that the apex court is extending such leniency to a man who forcibly removed a sitting Chief Justice along with SC judges who rejected a Provisional Constitutional Order requiring them to retake their oath – an action that would have been tantamount to pledging allegiance to Musharraf.
Since his ouster former PM Nawaz Sharif has been relentless in accusing the judiciary of orchestrating a grand conspiracy to disqualify him with support of the ubiquitous establishment. This narrative starts to gain traction and credence when the same judiciary starts facilitating the return to politics of someone who has twice abrogated the constitution of the country. Not only that but it fortifies an increasing perception that accountability begins and ends with civilians and politicians while judges and generals are largely exempt from it. Even Musharraf’s express exit from the country in 2016 as he stood trial in multiple cases was reflective of this double standard after his three year travel ban was lifted by the SC under the pretext of medical treatment.
A skewed application of the rule of law only adds to the controversy surrounding this upcoming general election with multiple disqualifications of seasoned politicians preceding it, turncoats doing what they do best and an upper house election that is largely viewed as being engineered. Rather than reversing the process Musharraf should first be made to face trial in the charges against him, clear his name and only then be allowed to contest these elections similar to any other candidate. Not the other way around.
