AIRLINK 72.59 Increased By ▲ 3.39 (4.9%)
BOP 4.99 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (1.84%)
CNERGY 4.29 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.7%)
DFML 31.71 Increased By ▲ 0.46 (1.47%)
DGKC 80.90 Increased By ▲ 3.65 (4.72%)
FCCL 21.42 Increased By ▲ 1.42 (7.1%)
FFBL 35.19 Increased By ▲ 0.19 (0.54%)
FFL 9.33 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (2.3%)
GGL 9.82 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.2%)
HBL 112.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.36 (-0.32%)
HUBC 136.50 Increased By ▲ 3.46 (2.6%)
HUMNL 7.14 Increased By ▲ 0.19 (2.73%)
KEL 4.35 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (2.84%)
KOSM 4.35 Increased By ▲ 0.10 (2.35%)
MLCF 37.67 Increased By ▲ 1.07 (2.92%)
OGDC 137.75 Increased By ▲ 4.88 (3.67%)
PAEL 23.41 Increased By ▲ 0.77 (3.4%)
PIAA 24.55 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (1.45%)
PIBTL 6.63 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (2.63%)
PPL 125.05 Increased By ▲ 8.75 (7.52%)
PRL 26.99 Increased By ▲ 1.09 (4.21%)
PTC 13.32 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (1.83%)
SEARL 52.70 Increased By ▲ 0.70 (1.35%)
SNGP 70.80 Increased By ▲ 3.20 (4.73%)
SSGC 10.54 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
TELE 8.33 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.6%)
TPLP 10.95 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (1.39%)
TRG 60.60 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (2.21%)
UNITY 25.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.12%)
WTL 1.28 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.79%)
BR100 7,566 Increased By 157.7 (2.13%)
BR30 24,786 Increased By 749.4 (3.12%)
KSE100 71,902 Increased By 1235.2 (1.75%)
KSE30 23,595 Increased By 371 (1.6%)

EDITORIAL: To put it crudely, the end justifies the means. The end before the Supreme Court was to ensure that elections to the Punjab Assembly that was prematurely dissolved are held within the constitutionally mandated 90 days.

However, the answer to the question how to go about this lies within the jurisdiction of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

But that did not seem to be happening, mainly because all three players involved in the action – judiciary, the executive (coalition government) and the political opposition – were on different wave lengths as they nurtured conflicting positions.

Each one of them betrayed a grim reality that its mood and line of action was self-centered, and not in harmony with the need of the hour as they were oblivious of the ground reality that their country confronted existential challenges and their failure to arrive at a consensual position would seriously erode the people’s faith in democratic option for Pakistan.

Why were the Imran Khan-managed PTI coalition governments in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) dissolved? There is no plausible answer to it even today. Why was the PDM (Pakistan Democratic Movement) coalition government against the elections for the provincial assemblies that are constitutionally permitted and a hallmark of functional democracies? Its call for same-day polls both for the national and provincial assemblies may be less costly, but what about the provincial autonomy, particularly when Pakistan is a federation and not a unitary state.

As for the expenses on the elections, nowhere is polling a free lunch. And as for the security for peaceful polling, is there any sign or guarantee that it would be better in October than now? On the judicial front things didn’t happen as the people expected either.

But divisions and dissentions are constitutionally-recognised possibilities and realities. In fact, dissensions in judgments are irrefutable proof of judges’ independence, and even when that happens the verdicts are owned collectively, although it rarely happened during the justiceship of the then Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.

But all of that is in the past, and the decision of the three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Ata Umar Bandial holds the ground.

Elections to the Punjab Assembly will be held on May 14, instead of October 8, the date the ECP fixed after cancelling its earlier schedule. And as for the ECP’s demand for financial expenditure and security, the apex court has asked it to approach the concerned authorities and promised help in case there are any reservations.

And this help is expected to come without any ifs and buts for Article 191 states, clearly and unambiguously, that “All executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan shall act in aid of the Supreme Court”.

If the ruling coalition is in its commanding position at the Centre and its government is in place courtesy of democratic process, then why should it oppose application of the same process in the province of Punjab? Is it that it fears losing the provincial elections to its political opponents? It is not “murder of justice”, as claimed by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, nor is it an issue that should end up in intervention by the forces, which may not like to intervene, but history says something different.

In the words of PILDAT chief Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, while there may be reasonable questions about the bench which delivered the judgement “the basic thrust of the order is in right direction. The order is very clear, emphatic and leaves almost nothing to chance.

In some words, the verdict of the bench needs to be appreciated for its clarity”. The ECP does have full authority to do what it thinks is necessary to hold free, fair and impartial elections, but that authority is exercisable only within the timeframe of 90 days following dissolution of an assembly.

Seeking review of the apex court’s verdict and that by the same bench is federal government’s only legal right to exercise with a view to putting off elections. So, instead of looking back, the federal government and parliament should look ahead and gear up for elections for Punjab assembly on May 14, 2023.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023

Comments

Comments are closed.