Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Analysis: For Musharraf, 1973 document wasn’t the constitution

Posted by

ET: ISLAMABAD: The historic trial of former president Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf has thrown up a number of puzzling constitutional questions – particularly given that this case is the first of its sort in Pakistan.

Among the questions are the arguments being posed by Musharraf’s legal team – and not only in the treason trial itself.

The basis of the treason trial, the Supreme Court’s historic ‘July 31’ (2009) verdict that held Musharraf guilty of unconstitutional acts, has been challenged by the former president and army chief – and his petition, which has been accepted for hearing, has a number of elaborate arguments.

In his review petition against the ‘July 31’ judgment, Musharraf’s legal team has actually challenged the authenticity of the 1973 Constitution that the former army chief is facing trial for abrogating, subverting and suspending.

 photo 51_zpsc33cfef9.jpg

The argument here is that the promulgation of the document that we know and treat as the Constitution is a mere act of parliament and nothing more.

More: 

Posted by on January 11, 2014. Filed under Asia,Pakistan. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

One Response to Analysis: For Musharraf, 1973 document wasn’t the constitution

  1. Abdul Alim

    January 11, 2014 at 8:13 pm

    Absolutely correct argument and Pakistan should abrogate 1973 Constitution and form a new Constituent Assembly to frame a new one. Only this is the way Pakistan can be saved.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>