Courting confusion as usual
Top Stories
- Spot-fixing: Petition in SC seeks stay on IPL matches, seeks SIT probe
- India, China call for end to incursion issue, sign 8 deals to boost ties
- Sanjay Dutt spends restless nights as officials yet to decide on his jail
- Aarushi murder case: Rajesh Talwar claims he was asleep when killings took place
- Railgate: BJP protests against CBI DIG for shielding Pawan Bansal
Last week's Supreme Court verdict holding military men responsible for rigging elections in 1990 is unlikely to discourage the armed forces from interfering in Pakistan's politics
Pakistan's Supreme Court last week gave a short order on a 16-year-old petition from 1996 by Air Marshal (retd) Asghar Khan challenging the army's intervention in the 1990 elections. The then army chief, Mirza Aslam Beg, and his chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Lt Gen (retd) Asad Durrani, were accused of bribing a number of politicians to influence the elections.
Many in Pakistan view the decision as another watershed judgment that will block any future military intervention in politics. The superior court was of the opinion that the army, its intelligence agencies and presidency should abstain from interfering with people's freedom and fundamental right to elect their representatives. The army and ISI had colluded with then President Ishaq Khan to ensure Benazir Bhutto didn't get elected. Thus, in a short order, the SC held Beg and Durrani responsible for rigging the 1990 elections and ordered the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to investigate the culprits, including the politicians who took bribes, and the government to recover the money.
The question is, where does Pakistan stand today due to this decision? Will this ensure the military's accountability and discourage it from forcibly taking over the state?
The court has also instructed the ISI and military intelligence not to have any political cells that are used to manipulate politics. However, the army has claimed through the defence secretary, who is a retired army general, that it closed down the political cell five years ago. The question is, how does one trust this statement, given that a political cell was never part of the ISI or the army's structure, and there is no guarantee that it was closed down or will not reappear in the future? For instance, the former ISI chief Lt Gen (retd) Ahmed Shuja Pasha's alleged support for Imran Khan's party was also an intervention that may have happened with or without a full-fledged political cell — that is, if we are to believe the claim that such a cell has not existed for the past five years.
... contd.
Please read our terms of use before posting commentsEditors’ Pick
- Former Ranji player among 3 more held
- Rajasthan Royals to file FIR against tainted trio
- If found guilty, BCCI to ask ICC to erase Sreesanth records
- Top cops among 42 named in death of blast accused
- Manmohan-Li talks: PM takes tough line on incursion issue
- Security forces blame Maoists, villagers say CoBRA man was killed in 'friendly fire'
- Travellers’ nightmare: Yellow fever vaccine stocks run out, production unit awaits repair


The responsibility to protect
Ego trips
A police force of his own
A suitable CAG




















