ABOUT 100 km north of Islamabad, the Field General Court Martial (FGCM) at Attock Fort quietly pursues the in-camera trial of the four army officers accused of masterminding a coup against Pakistan's civil and military leadership. And as the trial continues amidst much secrecy, the Supreme Court is pondering whether these officers' human rights have been violated.
Major-General Zaheerul Islam Abbasi, Brigadier Mustansar Billah, Colonel Mohammad Azad Minhas, Colonel Inyatullah Khan and one civilian, Qari Saifullah Akhtar, were arrested last September while allegedly trying to transport weapons to Rawalpindi from Darra Adam Khel, a town in the North Western Frontier Province known for arms manufacture. The officers are being tried under the Pakistan Army Act for conduct prejudicial to good order and military discipline, conspiring to wage war against Pakistan and attempting to sway people from their allegiance to the government.
It all began when the officers and a few 'accomplices' were apprehended for arms dealing. The arrest led to the recovery of 26 AK-47 rifles, rocket launchers, 50 hand grenades, a complete set of 30 commando uniforms, seven sets of walkie talkies,63 AK-47 magazines and 60 pistols (of Chinese and local origin).
During investigations by military agencies, the group claimed that these weapons were meant for Kashmir. While the authorities initially went along with this version, they later veered around to the view that the motive was far more seditious and the officers had plans to eliminate the military leadership as well as the President and Prime Minister of Pakistan. Seven other officers and civilians, who were suspected to be involved, were also taken into custody but released later. The authorities say the accused major-general and brigadier were disgruntled as they had been passed over for promotion. Said a defence ministry official: "They were incensed and frustrated and disguised their personal ambitions behind religious enthusiasm and motivated their accomplices to join their holy cause."
The unsuccessful crusaders wanted to impose a self-styled Shariat and their leader was to acquire the dual title of chief of the army staff and Amirul Momineen. Later, the official inquiry indicated that the incident had nothing to do with the 'Kashmiri jehad' nor was it linked to any religious or political party.
The trial started on December 31 and since then day-to-day hearings are being held. One of the lawyers said the verdict could take months. However, as the proceedings of the military court are being conducted in-camera, the exact details are hard to come by.
The entire saga took an interesting turn when Begum Shahida Abbasi, the wife of the main accused, filed a petition in Pakistan's Supreme Court challenging the authority of the court martial and alleging that it violated her husband's human rights. Soon the relatives of the other accused also joined in and the families of at least two officers have alleged in the court that their husbands have been badly tortured while in detention. Hence, a full bench of the highest court is now hearing all petitions together. Since the Supreme Court is involved, the issue has sparked off much public debate.
Abbasi has asked the court to order the immediate release of her husband. Her lawyer, Justice (retd) K.M. Samdani, terms the trial unfair and has urged the court to protect the detenu against 'the farce of a FGCM'. It was during this hearing on January 28 that the Supreme Court issued a notice to the army chief to appear before the court and present his point of view. However, the next day, the court quickly issued a clarification saying that it had only asked for the army chief's opinion and had not actually summoned him.
For its part, the government maintains that the Supreme Court cannot hear or interfere in the military trial of coup plotters. The official argument is that if the accused want to be released, they are free to move a petition before the military court.
The wife of another officer, Mohammad Hamid, a prospective prosecution witness, also moved the court on February 1, pleading that her husband be released and that the army authorities and federal government be restrained from 'using illegal ways and means to make him turn against the accused'. She maintains that her husband was abducted from his office and was being detained without legal authority. "The whole purpose of abducting and torturing him was to force him into supporting a false and fabricated story, which appeared to be a brainchild of the intelligence agencies with the objective of establishing a case against the said army officers," she contended.
And as the country argues the issues thrown up by the case—Shariat, democracy, human rights—observers make an interesting point. All the successful bids to overthrow a civilian government have been made by chiefs of the army staff; none of the attempts made by officers down the ladder has succeeded. The first such attempt, the Rawalpindi conspiracy case in 1951, involved both army officers and civilians, including the renowned poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz. The present case comes up for hearing again on March 3 when, the Supreme Court will take up allegations of human rights violation against the army.
Tags