On the evening of October 12, 1999, General Musharraf was supposed to address the country after assuming office. Colonel Ashfaq Hussain and General Usmani assisted Musharraf in drafting the speech. The Army House in Karachi was to record the address. After midnight, the recording of Musharraf’s address was finished around 1:40 a.m. It was now prepared for broadcast on PTV, the official station. The PTV authorities, however, were unsure of the protocol that should have been followed for Musharraf’s speech.
The playing of the national anthem before the speech caused some confusion. Considering that according to procedure, the national anthem should only be played before the prime minister’s speech. The playing of the national anthem was not necessary before the Army Chief’s address. To solve this issue, the PTV personnel approached the GHQ. But the GHQ was also unsure of the proper etiquette for General Musharraf’s statement. However, the national anthem was not played during General Musharraf’s statement, which was broadcast at 2:40 a.m. Instead of being known as the Chief Martial Law Administrator, General Musharraf became the Chief Executive.
On the evening of October 12, 1999, General Musharraf was supposed to address the country after assuming office. Colonel Ashfaq Hussain and General Usmani assisted Musharraf in drafting the speech. The Army House in Karachi was to record the address. After midnight, the recording of Musharraf’s address was finished around 1:40 a.m. It was now prepared for broadcast on PTV, the official station. The PTV authorities, however, were unsure of the protocol that should have been followed for Musharraf’s speech.
The ousted administration was powerless to respond because jailed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Despite not wanting to challenge Musharraf, the opposition called for early elections. Musharraf and his colleagues were unsure about their support for the Supreme Court Bar. So, General Musharraf started holding private meetings with each judge of the Supreme Court one at a time. Musharraf and his associates met with Supreme Court judges in an effort to win the support of the judicial branch. Generals started talking to the judges on October 13, the day after the coup.
Who met with whom, what was decided upon at these sessions, and how much of the resolution was actually carried out? This will be demonstrated by me, Faisal Warraich, in the History of Pakistan series by “Dekho, Suno, Jano.” Following a coup, General Musharraf proclaimed a state of emergency in Pakistan. Musharraf had deposed a legitimately elected government in accordance with the Constitution. Any person was forbidden from suspending the Constitution or using force to do so under Article 6 of the Constitution.
The Constitution also set a severe treason penalty for this offence. Additionally, the Courts were forbidden from approving the suspension and abolition of the Constitution. And the individual who had approved the Constitutional infraction was to be punished by the Parliament. High treason offences are punishable by anything up to the death penalty. As soon as Musharraf became aware of the seriousness of the situation, he contacted the senior judges. Chief Justice Saeeduz Zaman Siddiqui convened a meeting of the judges on the evening of October 13 on this case.
The purpose of this gathering was to determine how the judiciary should respond to Musharraf’s military takeover. First, General Musharraf requested a meeting with Pakistan’s Chief Justice via a message. Musharraf despatched a messenger to Chief Justice Siddiqui prior to the Judges’ meeting. The military government would not impose any restrictions on the court, he assured the Chief Justice. The message announced that the judiciary would continue to operate as normal. It indicated that General Musharraf was unwilling to suspend the Constitution’s judicial protections. The meeting of the Supreme Court judges and Musharraf’s message took place simultaneously.
Given that the judges had taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, they proposed, taking into consideration the fact that Musharraf had broken the law by refusing to implement it, The Judiciary should take suo moto notice in order to assess the legitimacy of the military coup. But the vast majority of the judges present at that discussion were against it. Even a high-ranking judge, Munir A. Sheikh, said that President Rafiq Tarar was still in charge of the country. Justice Sheikh advised waiting to see how President Obama would respond to Musharraf’s takeover. Any subsequent decisions should be made by the judiciary.
As a result, suo moto action was avoided and Musharraf had time to solidify his position due to the judges’ lack of agreement. An immediate response from the Court might have prevented the Martial Law, in light of the then-President SCBA Hamid Khan. Musharraf had time to look for his preferred Supreme Court justices as a result. When General Musharraf started to approach the judges, Irshad Hassan Khan, a senior judge, surreptitiously assisted him. However, Justice Irshad’s assistance was insufficient. Musharraf’s main concern was whether to remove Chief Justice Siddiqui from his position or win his support.
The Army Chief was not given the power to depose Pakistan’s Chief Justice under the Constitution. General Musharraf chose to personally meet with the Chief Justice as a result. This story is told in its entirety in Hamid Khan’s book. In the meeting, the Chief Justice informed Musharraf that the military coup he had carried out was illegal and unconstitutional. Justice Siddiqui asserted that there was a solution, though. Nawaz Sharif, the ousted prime minister, had to sign the summary in order to dissolve the assemblies. And President Rafiq Tarar should receive this summary for implementation.
In this manner, according to Justice Siddiqui, the assemblies would be legally dissolved to allow for new elections in the nation. He claimed that a caretaker administration might take over while new elections were held. In this manner, the military administration would have 90 days to convene new elections. The Chief Justice further pledged to assist Musharraf in extending the tenure of the interim administration should he be successful in getting Nawaz Sharif to sign the summary. The application of Article 6 to General Musharraf’s coup would therefore be eliminated.
The general was aware of how crucial the constitution was. He sent General Mahmood to obtain Nawaz Sharif to sign the summary that would dissolve the assemblies. General Mahmood allegedly approached Nawaz Sharif, but other generals allegedly did as well. He fiercely objected, saying he would only sign the summary “over my dead body.” When he was unable to convince Nawaz Sharif to sign the summary, General Musharraf came up with alternative plans. Musharraf was running out of time due to the numerous court proceedings filed in opposition to his takeover.
In the petitions questions were raised on the legitimacy of Musharraf’s act of overthrowing the civil government. The Bench of Justice Siddique admitted petitions against the Musharraf’s takeover to regular hearing. A Full Bench was constituted to hear the petition field by PML-N’s Zafar Ali Shah. This petition was fixed for hearing before the Full Bench on January 31, 2000. The decision in this petition had to decide the fate of Musharraf by accepting or rejecting his coup. Hence it was a matter of life and death for him and his colleagues in the takeover.
The validity of Musharraf’s act of removing the civil government was questioned in the petitions. The Justice Siddique Bench granted regular hearing to petitions opposing Musharraf’s takeover. To hear the plea filed by Zafar Ali Shah of the PML-N, a Full Bench was established. On January 31, 2000, a hearing for this petition before the Full Bench was scheduled. By supporting or rejecting Musharraf’s coup, the outcome of this petition had to determine his future. Therefore, the takeover was a life-or-death situation for him and his coworkers.
The ruling required the government to do away with interest on all loans. On the panel that decided this petition, there was also Justice Wajihuddin Ahmad and Justice Munir A Sheikh. The Bench set a deadline of December 25 to issue the ruling. However, the Musharraf administration had asked the Court to put off making a ruling. The request was supported by the government despite the lengthy wait in making the decision. However, the judiciary rejected the government’s request and made the ruling public. The Court had declared interest to be “riba,” which was against Islamic law.
Since the choice was solely motivated by personal interests, it had to directly affect the state’s economy. General Musharraf became concerned as a result of the courts’ independent rulings. They believed that such a free-standing choice might also cause them to leave. As a result, they made the decision to require the judges to swear a new oath and submit to military rule. The Musharraf administration began making plans for this. However, Musharraf wanted to speak with Justice Siddiqui before the judge took a fresh oath of office in order to get a sense on what was likely to happen with the petitions opposing the military takeover.
The case challenging Musharraf’s move had to be heard by the Supreme Court after six days. Everything Musharraf needed to do, then, had to be accomplished between January 25 and January 31, 2000. On January 25, Chief Justice Saeeduz Zaman Siddiqui met with General Musharraf at his request. Attorney General Aziz A. Munshi and General Musharraf’s legal assistant Sharifuddin Pirzada were present. General Musharraf enquired of Justice Siddiqui the outcome of the petitions filed in opposition to his takeover. Justice Siddiqui retorted that the Court could only extend the military era by a maximum of two years.
And at this time, it would be necessary to transfer power to the elected representatives. However, Sharifuddin Pirzada made a request before the Chief Justice that not even the Supreme Court could fulfil. He wished for General Musharraf to be given constitutional amendment power by the Chief Justice as well. The Chief Justice was enraged by this demand and declined to grant General Musharraf this authority. General Musharraf was equally enraged by this direct response. The meeting then became extremely tense.
General Musharraf started to threaten Justice Siddiqui while this situation dragged on. Musharraf attempted to persuade Justice Siddiqui of his abilities as Army Chief in an effort to change his views. Musharraf was challenged by Justice Siddiqui, who asserted his position as Pakistan’s Chief Justice. General Musharraf and the others departed the conference, which ended on a very negative tone, but Justice Siddiqui was held at his home. Communication between Justice Siddiqui and the outside world was halted. Everything took place on January 25th night.
The Pakistani Chief Justice had protested General Musharraf that evening. However, Irshad Hassan Khan, another judge, had given in to Musharraf’s demands. Musharraf was promised by Justice Irshad that his military coup would be recognised. that he would also permit the military to rule for more than two years and rewrite the Constitution. Out of the twelve Supreme Court justices, Justice Irshad also informed Musharraf that seven of them were present. The majority of justices, according to Justice Irshad, were behind him in making the decision that Musharraf wanted.
The country’s whole higher judiciary was thus transformed by the following morning. The judges’ rather oath was also modified. General Musharraf’s order, which was passed on October 14, 1999, made it essential for the judges to take a new oath on January 26, 2000, which is when this occurrence occurred. Common names for it included Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). This Order had appointed Musharraf as Pakistan’s Chief Executive while he was also serving as Army Chief. The Constitution, which was designed to rule the entire nation, was also rendered subject to his orders. Obviously, Musharraf did not receive the support of the entire Supreme Court.
The country’s whole higher judiciary was thus transformed by the following morning. The judges’ rather oath was also modified. General Musharraf’s order, which was passed on October 14, 1999, made it essential for the judges to take a new oath on January 26, 2000, which is when this occurrence occurred. Common names for it included Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). This Order had appointed Musharraf as Pakistan’s Chief Executive while he was also serving as Army Chief. The Constitution, which was designed to rule the entire nation, was also rendered subject to his orders.
Obviously, Musharraf did not receive the support of the entire Supreme Court. The country’s whole higher judiciary was thus transformed by the following morning. The judges’ rather oath was also modified. General Musharraf’s order, which was passed on October 14, 1999, made it essential for the judges to take a new oath on January 26, 2000, which is when this occurrence occurred. Common names for it included Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). This Order had appointed Musharraf as Pakistan’s Chief Executive while he was also serving as Army Chief.
The Constitution, which was designed to rule the entire nation, was also rendered subject to his orders. Obviously, Musharraf did not receive the support of the entire Supreme Court. The country’s whole higher judiciary was thus transformed by the following morning. The judges’ rather oath was also modified. General Musharraf’s order, which was passed on October 14, 1999, made it essential for the judges to take a new oath on January 26, 2000, which is when this occurrence occurred. Common names for it included Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). This Order had appointed Musharraf as Pakistan’s Chief Executive while he was also serving as Army Chief.
The Constitution, which was designed to rule the entire nation, was also rendered subject to his orders. Obviously, Musharraf did not receive the support of the entire Supreme Court. The country’s whole higher judiciary was thus transformed by the following morning. The judges’ rather oath was also modified. General Musharraf’s order, which was passed on October 14, 1999, made it essential for the judges to take a new oath on January 26, 2000, which is when this occurrence occurred. Common names for it included Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO).
This Order had appointed Musharraf as Pakistan’s Chief Executive while he was also serving as Army Chief. The Constitution, which was designed to rule the entire nation, was also rendered subject to his orders. Obviously, Musharraf did not receive the support of the entire Supreme Court. The country’s whole higher judiciary was thus transformed by the following morning. The judges’ rather oath was also modified. General Musharraf’s order, which was passed on October 14, 1999, made it essential for the judges to take a new oath on January 26, 2000, which is when this occurrence occurred.
Common names for it included Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). This Order had appointed Musharraf as Pakistan’s Chief Executive while he was also serving as Army Chief. The Constitution, which was designed to rule the entire nation, was also rendered subject to his orders. Obviously, Musharraf did not receive the support of the entire Supreme Court. The country’s whole higher judiciary was thus transformed by the following morning. The judges’ rather oath was also modified.
General Musharraf’s order, which was passed on October 14, 1999, made it essential for the judges to take a new oath on January 26, 2000, which is when this occurrence occurred. Common names for it included Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). This Order had appointed Musharraf as Pakistan’s Chief Executive while he was also serving as Army Chief. The Constitution, which was designed to rule the entire nation, was also rendered subject to his orders. Obviously, Musharraf did not receive the support of the entire Supreme Court.
The country’s whole higher judiciary was thus transformed by the following morning. The judges’ rather oath was also modified. General Musharraf’s order, which was passed on October 14, 1999, made it essential for the judges to take a new oath on January 26, 2000, which is when this occurrence occurred. Common names for it included Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). This Order had appointed Musharraf as Pakistan’s Chief Executive while he was also serving as Army Chief. The Constitution, which was designed to rule the entire nation, was also rendered subject to his orders. Obviously, Musharraf did not receive the support of the entire Supreme Court.
After all of this planning, it was none other than the person who had promised Musharraf that he would make the decision he liked. Justice Irshad Hassan Khan was appointed Pakistan’s Chief Justice. Musharraf had been somewhat saved from the hanging sword of Article 6 by the PCO-oath of judges. Now that petitions against Musharraf were to be considered, the PCO justices and Chief Justice were put to the test. In either scenario, the defence of General Musharraf’s military coup would be resolved. As a result, the court heard the case.
However, Justice Irshad’s newly assembled Bench was assigned to hear the case. All PCO-Judges were included in the new Bench. The bench’s chief justice was Irshad Hassan Khan. Therefore, on May 12, this 12-member Bench issued a ruling in which it approved Musharraf’s overthrow on October 12. The Bench unanimously gave Musharraf a pass on his takeover by relying on the “doctrine of necessity.” The Bench defended Musharraf’s actions in toppling the civil administration and assuming power. The Court upheld Musharraf’s Martial Law, labelling it “extra-constitutional.”
It stated that Musharraf’s move “was also applauded at the public level” and that it was done in the public good. Musharraf was even given permission by the court to change the Constitution. A individual could now amend the Constitution at his or her whim. Otherwise, it was against the law for anyone to change even one word of the Constitution. A two-thirds majority in both the National Assembly and the Senate was required for a constitutional modification. You may remember that General Ziaul Haq also received the same authority from the Court. The Constitution has also undergone numerous amendments thanks to General Zia.
The judges also provided a justification for taking the PCO oath in their ruling. They defended their PCO oath by stating that it was taken to prevent anarchy in the nation. Within the confines of the Supreme Judicial Council’s Code of Conduct, they administered the PCO oath. Interestingly, the Bench had also dismissed the petitions that were in opposition to this ruling in the same judgement. General Musharraf’s wishes were followed in making the decision up until this point. The Court gave Musharraf a lot, but it opposed the army’s protracted stay under civil rule. Therefore, Musharraf was given three years by the court to carry out his seven-point plan before leaving after the elections.
In regards to this aspect of the choice, Musharraf and his associates were quite dissatisfied. So they openly criticised the choice to express their dissatisfaction. Musharraf established the National Accountability Bureau in order to hold politicians “ruthlessly” accountable. Lt. Gen. Syed Muhammad Amjad served as the director of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB). Over a three-year period, the Court was opposed by the Chairman of NAB, the Interior Minister, and the DG ISPR. They considered the three-year span to be very brief. The three-year army rule that the court authorised angered Musharraf’s comrades as well.
On the other side, Musharraf was coming under increasing pressure from the international community to restore civil rule as soon as possible. In the wake of a plane hijacking, this pressure increased. At the turn of the century, on the eve of Christmas, this incident occurred. On December 24, 1999, an Indian Airlines passenger airliner was making its way from Kathmandu to New Delhi. This aircraft was hijacked by five members of the Kashmiri organisation Harkatul Mujahideen. Up to 125 people may fit on the aircraft. The hijackers wanted to land the aircraft at Lahore. However, the aircraft lacked enough fuel to make it to Lahore. It had therefore arrived at Amritsar Airport.
The Indians had a chance to prevent their plane from being hijacked in Amritsar. The plane departed for Lahore despite the failure of the Indian security services. Ajit Doval, the current security adviser, was the Indian IB Chief at the time. He received harsh criticism for letting the plane fly out of India. The airliner asked Pakistani authorities for permission to land. However, no authorization was granted. The airports in Lahore had their lights turned off. They were also placed on when the aircraft was about to crash land. As soon as the plane touched down in Lahore, India made two demands to Pakistan.
India wished Pakistan to prevent the chopper from reaching its High Commissioner in Islamabad and the jet from leaving Lahore. India wished for as soon as possible for its High Commissioner to speak with the hijackers. As long as it was providing aircraft to the Indian High Commissioner, Pakistan declined to stop the plane. In addition, the hijackers asked that Pakistan give the plane fuel and let them land part of the passengers in Lahore. The plane was refuelled by Pakistani authorities, who then urged it to take off while rejecting the other demand. The jet was flown to Dubai by the hijackers. They discharged 27 passengers in Dubai, including one who was hurt and eventually passed afterwards. India asked Dubai’s authorities for authorization so that its forces might conduct a commando operation at the airport.
India wished Pakistan to prevent the chopper from reaching its High Commissioner in Islamabad and the jet from leaving Lahore. India wished for as soon as possible for its High Commissioner to speak with the hijackers. As long as it was providing aircraft to the Indian High Commissioner, Pakistan declined to stop the plane. In addition, the hijackers asked that Pakistan give the plane fuel and let them land part of the passengers in Lahore. The plane was refuelled by Pakistani authorities, who then urged it to take off while rejecting the other demand. The jet was flown to Dubai by the hijackers. They discharged 27 passengers in Dubai, including one who was hurt and eventually passed afterwards. India asked Dubai’s authorities for authorization so that its forces might conduct a commando operation at the airport.
India rejected the conditions and started blaming Pakistan for the jet hijacking. Pakistan vehemently refutes the accusations. The hijackers spoke with ambassadors from Afghanistan, India, and the UN. After six days, the release of Masood Azhar, Umar Sheikh, and Mushtaq Zargar by India signalled the end of the drop scene. These individuals were flown to Kandahar by the Indian Home Minister personally in a unique aircraft. The hijackers received the detainees in exchange for releasing the passengers. The Hurriyat activists who were freed also got to know Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden.
The Afghan authorities then gave the hijackers 10 hours to leave or they would be made to leave by force. The hijackers and activists who were freed then departed for an unspecified location. It should be noted that India pushed for Maulana Masood Azhar to be designated as a global terrorist. While Umar Sheikh was detained in Rawalpindi in connection with the slaying of American journalist Daniel Pearl. Daniel Pearl’s murder was also acknowledged to have been committed by Khalid Umar Sheikh, the purported mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Currently, Khalid is incarcerated in America. At the time, Musharraf was dealing with calls for democracy and accusations that he had backed extremists.
And Musharraf needed to put together his team in addition to fending off international pressure on these issues. He desired a group that would support him while he managed the administration and dealt with external pressure. So he put together a group of senior generals with the task of selecting the top candidates for this position. The individuals chosen by this team received the final approval from General Musharraf. International banker Shaukat Aziz was chosen by the group to serve as Finance Minister. and businessman Abdul Razzaq Dawood as Minister of Trade, and Zubeda Jalal as Minister of Education… and Dr. Irshat Hussain, an expert with the World Bank, for the position of Governor State Bank.
Musharraf was putting the finishing touches on his team for the government, but he was also having a difficulty. Nawaz Sharif was the defendant in this case. Nawaz Sharif was accused of hijacking a plane, threatening national sovereignty, and stoking unrest in the army. The case was being heard by the Special Court for Counterterrorism. The matter was resolved by the court on April 6, 2000. Nawaz Sharif was found guilty by the court, given a life sentence on two counts, and had his assets frozen. Rehmat Hussain Jaffry, a Special Court judge, made the choice.
General Musharraf and his associates disapproved of the choice. They demanded that Nawaz Sharif be sentenced to death. Therefore, a petition was submitted to demand Nawaz Sharif’s execution on the grounds that he had committed a serious crime. The Musharraf administration asked the court to increase Nawaz Sharif’s death sentence conviction. To hold a regular hearing, the appeal was accepted. What happened to Nawaz Sharif’s request for the death penalty? Why were American commandos given a day’s worth of control over Pakistan’s airports?
A superpower’s president visited Pakistan, but he declined to formally shake hands with Musharraf. What tale was this? Where were the plans for the 9/11 attacks? Watch the History of Pakistan’s upcoming episode to see all of this. One of the most significant nations in the globe is Pakistan. Without Pakistan’s crucial contribution, no contemporary worldwide movement would be possible.
Every student, journalist, and expert on international events must view The History of Pakistan to fully understand everything. Given the hectic lives of today, we have also made this task simple for them all. You can either click here to learn more about the topic in detail or read a number of books on the subject. The biographies of famous people teach us a lot about the world. To learn about those who altered the course of history and how China came to dominate the globe, go here.Contact Us