AS HIS tearful lawyer likes to remind the press, the mother of Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s former military dictator, is ill, and is in Dubai. This offers Pakistan’s government and judiciary an excuse to make a “humanitarian” gesture. They could release him from the comfortable house arrest in Islamabad where he is awaiting trial on a number of charges, and let him scuttle out of the country. Instead, Nawaz Sharif, installed as prime minister after an election in May, told parliament this week that Mr Musharraf would be charged with treason—an offence punishable by a life sentence or death.

In 1999 the then General Musharraf led a coup that ended Mr Sharif’s last stint as prime minister. He ran the country as president for nine years. He is accused of complicity in the killing of a separatist leader in Balochistan and of Benazir Bhutto, a former prime minister, and of illegally jailing judges; but the accusation of treason seems most clear-cut, since he abrogated the constitution and declared a state of emergency.

There are several reasons why trying him looks like a bad idea. It reeks of the vengefulness that has poisoned Pakistani politics. It risks distracting Mr Sharif from the jobs he was elected to do—stop the power cuts, fix the failing economy and bring peace to a country still ravaged by terrorist violence. But the strongest argument against a trial is that it threatens to cause a bruising confrontation with the armed forces and thus encourage yet another military coup. The regular intervention of soldiers in Pakistani politics has undermined civilian institutions, encouraged the growth of terrorist organisations, distorted spending priorities and poisoned relations with India.

That is also why trying Mr Musharraf is the right thing to do. Pakistan’s soldiers need to be discouraged from intervening ever again. The best way of doing that is for democratically elected leaders to assert their authority over military ones. Mr Sharif has a chance to hold a military dictator to account in a country in which military dictators have enjoyed impunity.

The chances of a repeat of 1999 are small. Fourteen years ago Mr Sharif led a corrupt and inept regime whose collapse many Pakistanis and foreigners cheered. Now he is newly re-elected, with a strong mandate after a healthy turnout. Pakistanis are inclined to believe that he has learned from his mistakes, and he has not yet had time to prove them wrong. Few at home would support a coup. Mr Musharraf, who returned to Pakistan to take part in the election, believed he was popular there. He soon found out he was not. The army’s current chief, General Ashfaq Kayani, is on his way out. A coup would also embarrass America, which provides Pakistan’s armed forces with huge amounts of cash. Mr Sharif is managing the politics of the trial carefully. Aware of the danger that it looks like a personal vendetta, he has sought support from other parties. He has also said that he holds Mr Musharraf solely responsible for the coup, which may have been a signal that he is not intending a broader purge.

Exile and the kingdom

And if Mr Musharraf is convicted? This newspaper has always opposed the death penalty, but a prison sentence would remind generals that mounting coups has consequences. Mr Sharif may well do a deal with the army to allow the convicted general to slip away to some Gulf state. A poor second best to a spell in jail. But if that were part of the price of letting Pakistanis see an army chief submit to the courts, so be it.