‘This government is beyond repair’

Q: Chaudhry ordered the government to begin looking into the hundreds of so-called Islamic extremists who had been detained and disappeared. Is this a factor in Musharraf’s decision?

A: Musharraf is a very skillful liar. He wants the world to feel that these disappeared people are Islamic militants, which is not true. I would say 60 percent to 70 percent on the list of the 141 disappeared people that we have given to the Supreme Court are Sindhi and Baloch nationalists who are secular. And some of these nationalists are well known in the country. They are poets and writers, and their work is secular. They have no connection to jihad, or al-Qaeda or Taliban. Either he’s living in denial or is misled. But I think he is just lying.

Q: But Chaudhry ruled that the government should produce the missing people, didn’t he?

A: As far as the missing people are concerned, Chaudhry has not given a single judgment on it. He kept the Human Rights Commission’s petition pending for one and a half months. But since we are lawyers of renown, it is very difficult for any judge to kick us around — he had to hear it. But he went at it very slowly. He did give a notice to the government (to act), but he really didn’t give a judgment. There was not a single time when he said that those who kept these people should be brought to justice. All he was doing was saying to the government, “Let’s find some people.” How can any court close its eye to hundreds of people who have disappeared?

Q: Was Musharraf worried that Chaudhry would rule against his retaining a dual role as president and chief of Army staff later this year?

A: Whether the president can continue to wear his uniform or not was not an issue. We do not think that any judge has that kind of courage, including Chaudhry. We don’t think that these judges have gumption or courage.

Q: What will happen if the Supreme Judicial Council exonerates and reinstalls the chief justice?

A: If the SJC restores (Chaudhry) to the bench I don’t know if he can perform independently because lawyers are championing his cause. Would a chief justice who comes back riding on the shoulders of lawyers be able to sit on the bench and not be able to think about the fact that he owes his reinstatement to lawyers?

Q: How do you see this ending?

A: They (the government) probably feel the longer they prolong the proceedings the greater the chance that the movement will eventually fizzle out. My own assessment is that the situation will become defused because lawyers can’t stay on strike and keep protesting for months on end. But this government will make another mistake. This government is beyond repair.