Losing its second most important wicket - that of National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq - to PTI's Kaptaan himself, the Nawaz League does not seem to know how to handle the NA-122 election tribunal verdict. At first, the party said despite some reservations it respects the result. Then the Leaguers came out to launch an assault on both the judge and his judgement. The Punjab law Minister Rana Sanaullah went so far as to attack the integrity of former Justice Kazim Ali Malik, accusing him of acting out of a revenge motive after having failed to secure a provincial assembly election ticket for his son. Justice Malik, of course, rebutted the charge pointing out that his decisions in 30 constituencies had favoured the ruling party candidates.
With the fall of the PML-N's third wicket yesterday, the PTI has completed a hat-trick, the third one though is not as important as the other two. These three seats are where Imran Khan had initially demanded a vote audit. Ayaz Sadiq (PML-N's second wicket) was the custodian of the nation's highest legislative forum. His loss as Rana Sanaullah admitted in the course of his tirade against the tribunal judge is to affect the party's image. So the party is unwilling to give in easily. Like the Railways minister Khawaja Saad Rafique before, who obtained a stay order from the Supreme Court against the election tribunal's decision to annul the NA-125 result ordering re-election, Ayaz Sadiq too, is going to go into appeal against the verdict. Which, of course, is his legal right. The Nawaz League's contention, as in the case of Khawaja, is that he has not been held responsible for any wrongdoing, the annulment is based on electoral irregularities - something for which he is not personally responsible.
The irregularities though are astounding, indeed. According to forensic reports presented before the tribunal, as many as 93,882 votes were not verified because of bad printing; Nadra had no record of 6,015 national identity cards used for voting; 225 duplicate NICs were recorded, one of them three times; 570 of the voters did not even belong to NA-122. That raises serious questions about the electoral process. If some 93,882 votes are not verifiable what is the use of instituting various measures to ensure the authenticity of votes cast?
Similarly, in the case of Khawaja Saad Rafique, who for the last four months continues to retain NA seat and the ministry on stay - for an unspecified duration - the tribunal that annulled the result of his constituency said that irregularities were found which raised doubts about the validity of the election. Listed among a number of 'irregularities' was the discovery that the returning officers (ROs) received vote count statements (forms 14&15) from presiding officer without their signatures, voter thumb impressions, counter foils, even electoral rolls. To top it all, the tribunal said that the ROs prepared final results without opening the polling bags, taking into account the rejected ballot papers, or the number of votes challenged.
If that is not scandalising enough about what went on in NA-125, there are the findings of an investigation commission appointed by the tribunal under a retired sessions judge. Aside from pointing to other 'irregularities' the commission discovered that "each polling bag of the constituency is in condition of such a mess that it can be said to be trash and rubbish for reasons best known to the polling personnel. The polling bag of each polling station shows that the process of the election carried out is the result of gross mismanagement." Notably, the Peoples Representative Act, 1976, makes no mention of 'rigging' but talks about "corrupt practices" as a cognizable offense. For all practical purposes the preceding details fall within the definition of "corrupt practices". It could be a mere coincidence though that the beneficiary in at least these three cases is the same party.
Despite declaring that the 2013 elections in 'large part' were conducted fairly, in a rather discordant note the Judicial Commission too recorded a long list of what it called "shortcomings of the ECP" in the electoral process. In Punjab, for instance, according to the Commission report, the formula on how to calculate estimated ballot requirements was not agreed upon between the ECP and the Joint Provincial Election Commissioner, Punjab, which led to two different revised schedules issued within a day of each other, creating confusion and suspicions. And the ECP either did not know about this or chose not to comment on it. Furthermore, continues the report, the ECP did not seem to have any way of knowing how things were progressing on the ground either prior to the election or during the Election Day. There was no monitoring wing in the ECP. The ECP had no effective system to monitor whether or not its directives were being implemented on the ground. Even the number of ballots requisitioned per constituency were not reviewed by anybody to ensure their uniformity as required by the Action plans, thus excessive ballot requisitions went unnoticed. Then the chain of command and organisational structure between various officials and their liaison appearing in the ECP handouts, observes the report, looked largely ineffective in practice as very little information seemed to filter back to the ECP, which was the instructing body and had ultimate responsibility for the organisation and conduct of the elections.
The ECP has clearly failed to fulfil its responsibilities effectively and conduct the elections in a fair manner. Whether it is guilty on account of irregularities or shortcomings, the result is misrepresentation of the people. Almost all political parties have cried foul. At present, it is not the PTI alone asking for the resignations of ECP officials; the Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Syed Khurshid Shah, too, iterated his party's demand on Tuesday for them to stand down.
Subsequent to a decisive vote of no-confidence from the two major parties, and substantial proof of failure to do their duty - as reflected by evidence placed before election tribunals and the Judicial Commission - there is no moral justification for the ECP chief and members to hold on to their positions. Unfortunately, these people remain unrepentant and unashamed of their conduct, daring instead the PTI to take the legal course for their removal and refer the matter to the Supreme Judicial Council.
[email protected]
Comments
Comments are closed.