Running away?

On June 12, a Karachi court struck down a government order barring former military ruler Pervez Musharraf from leaving the country. Musharraf, who has faced a battery of court cases - including a treason charge - since returning to Pakistan from self-imposed exile last year, had been waiting since April for this decision.

The former president's departure from Pakistan could remove a source of friction between the country's powerful generals and the government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. However, the government can still appeal the court's decision.

In a DW interview, Musharraf's lawyer, Farogh Naseem, says the treason case against his client is very weak and that the former president does not need to run away from trials.

DW: Does Pervez Musharraf intend to leave the country after the court's decision to lift a ban on his international traveling?

Farogh Naseem: Musharraf has told me that he wants to go abroad to meet his ailing mother, however, he intends to come back to Pakistan after that. Initially, he wanted to bring her for treatment to Pakistan but the doctors in the United Arab Emirates did not permit her to travel. My client wants to clear his name in all cases against him. He hasn't committed any crime so he doesn't need to fear anything.

If Musharraf manages to go out of Pakistan, could this damage his political reputation in the country. Do you agree?

Political opponents will obviously try to score points. What I can say is that if Musharraf has the legal right to move freely, then he should exercise it.

What is the legal standing of the travel ban?

The Supreme Court had said that until the start of the treason case against Musharraf, he shouldn't be allowed to leave the country. The apex court, however, did not extend this decision once the case formally began. It is now totally fair that Musharraf can go out of country and come back whenever the court demands.

We must also keep in mind that the former president has received bail in all other cases except the treason trial. There is no case against him which restricts his international traveling. It was Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's government which put Musharraf's name on the 'Exit Control List.'

The lifting of the ban, many experts say, is a sign that Sharif's government does not want to irk Pakistan's military generals any longer by detaining their former chief. Is this true?

It is quite clear that the leadership of the Pakistani army and security agencies have been supporting Musharraf wholeheartedly. They back him because he was their chief. Also, Musharraf has no corruption charges pressed against him - a fact that has also been acknowledged by the courts. The military probably feels that its former head, who served the country with honesty and devotion, is being unnecessarily maligned. But this is my analysis - the military leadership has not conveyed this to me.

What is your assessment of the treason case against Pakistan's former military ruler?

It is a weak case. The court now admits that Musharraf declared the emergency rule in 2007 on the advice of then Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz and his cabinet. He was a civilian president at that time. The case doesn't hold any ground if you keep these facts in mind.

Musharraf is not the only ruler who has declared emergency rule. Former Indian Premier Indira Gandhi did the same in the 1970s and sacked a number of judges. No one ever called her a traitor.

The prosecutor alleges that Musharraf violated the constitution by presiding over the state of emergency. But there are many others who violated the constitution. Sharif, too, declared financial emergency in 1998 and also established military courts against the orders of Pakistan's highest court.

Also, Article 6 of the Pakistani Constitution states that every 'aider, abettor and collaborator' should be held responsible for breaching the constitution. If that is the case, then Musharraf didn't act alone. The whole parliament, cabinet ministers, army officers and bureaucrats were involved in the decision. So, the case is a mere attempt to target only Musharraf.

Musharraf's role in the "war against terror" from 2001 until the end of his tenure in 2008 is appreciated by the West. Do you think Western countries, particularly the United States, can exert their influence on the case?

It is true that Musharraf is admired in the West. Countries like US, Britain and Saudi Arabia have always supported him. I can't say, however, that Musharraf's international stature will have anything to do with the outcome of the trial.

Farogh Naseem is a Karachi-based constitutional lawyer who is currently defending former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. His is also a member of the board of studies of Karachi University's Faculty of Law.

The interview was conducted by Shamil Shams.