LAHORE-After General Yahya Khan, it is the second time in Pakistan history that the judiciary has summoned a former Head of the State, requiring him to defend his acts he carried out in the office. Although we have examples where Prime Minister was called by the Supreme Court in a criminal proceedings under the Contempt of Court of law, the summoning of former Army Chief-cum-President Pervez Musharraf in the on going civil nature proceedings, is unprecedented after the restoration of the sitting judiciary to its original position, having no parallel in history, through a public move which overruled the procedure, set by the PCO of November 3, 2007 as well as the decision which had validated the same. The judicial experts including Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan and former Chief Justice of Pakistan Saeeduz Zaman Siddique comment on the court notice that General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf, in response to that, may appear in person or through his counsel or avoid the appearance to let the Court decide the matter on his PCO ex parte. In view of Mr Aitzaz, Musharraf has an opportunity to defend his PCO as he has been made party in the matter before the court unlike Asma Jilani case of 1972. However, he believes the question of appearance before the Court is a big test of Musharraf. In view of Mr Siddique, the matter may cast far reaching effects on the judiciary and the political system of the country if Iqbal Tikka case also goes by means of nullification of the PCO and the state of emergency on November 3, 2007, whereof over 60 judges of the superior judiciary were sacked and detained with their families and a new judiciary of PCO-affected judges was created under which Musharraf took a number of actions. In his view it is not incumbent on the court to scrap all the acts carried out on the basis of the Emergency, but the court is competent to save those which meet the end of law and the Constitution under the doctrine of condonation. For example, holding of the last elections. He says in Asma Jilani case, the Court declared General Yahya Khan a 'usurper and his Martial Law invalid yet it protected the elections of 1970 held during his regime as this exercise was a legal requirement. Siddiqui says a President while holding the office enjoys immunity from appearance before the court in relation to any act with respect to the official duties or private but after he is out of the office, the court is very much authorised to summon him about the same. Hence Musharraf does not enjoy that Constitutional immunity any more. On the question of receipt of notice, experts say it is a process to intimate the party and it is served again on him if the execution of the same remains incomplete. However, the main object of serving notice is to intimate about the court call, and a person can appear even if he comes to know about it by any other means like media or from anyone. In the instant case, the news of the court notice is widespread through media which may become a source of his knowledge about the court call to him and that fact would be fortified further if he passes any comments on it even sitting outside the country. They say the case in hand is a high profile which may have deep repercussions, therefore, the court may have in its mind to hear Musharraf on PCO which he had loudly justified inside and outside. Now he has a chance to give rationale to his acts under the PCO and Emergency which also includes detention of the superior court judges. The court indeed is fulfilling an important legal requirement by calling him, they say adding, that it is an opportunity to Musharraf to defend his position on PCO and Emergency though no defence was provided to the deposed judges by the PCO-affected judiciary although these judges were directly affected party of Musharrafs act. In view of the experts, the court through its observations hinted at protecting democracy when the Federal Government has pulled back its hand on defending the PCO and the state of emergency, which Musharraf imposed, exercising his power as the then Army chief while superseding that of President of Pakistan which he was holding the same time. And later on he also dropped the need of passing his steps through the Parliamentary approval. The question is how all that has to be fit in a Constitutional system which exists at present. On the point of appearance of Musharraf, experts say first of all it has to be seen whether Pervez Musharraf accepts the existing judiciary and if he does not, then he may defy its call the same way Nawaz Sharif and Shahbaz Sharif did about the PCO judiciary. Anyway, whether or not he appears, the court has rightly called him to meet the legal requirements when he was named as a party and the main issue revolved around his acts and the same would go to give deep and wide acceptance to the final outcome, they say, adding, that if Musharraf does not appear or does not put in his representation that is likely to take him further back on his stand on PCO and Emergency.