Who’s responsible for local polls delay?

The judge directed the law officers to explain why local administrators were operating when their tenure had lapsed.


Express August 23, 2010

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday directed the federal and provincial governments make clear in the next hearing who was responsible for the delay in the holding of local bodies’ elections in the province.

Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed issued this order while hearing a petition challenging the appointment of administrators and delay in holding of the local bodies’ elections.

A law officer representing the provincial government told the court that it was the federal government’s job to hold the elections as the election commission fell under its jurisdiction.

A deputy attorney general on behalf of the federal government insisted that the provincial government was responsible for holding the elections in the province.

On this Justice Azmat Saeed got irritated and told both parties that they “should behave like upright men and not fight like women.”

The judge directed the law officers to explain under what law local administrators were operating when their legal tenure (that extended to 180 days) had lapsed. The judge issued this order after the petitioner’s counsel, Fawad Hussain Chaudhry, objected to the entire local government system led by the administrators and termed it contrary to the law.

The judge postponed the hearing till August 27.

The petition was submitted before the LHC by the Local Councils Association of Pakistan (LCAP). Anwar Hussain, the LCAP president, submitted that the provincial government had been trying to sabotage the working of the district governments from day one. The government has revived the commissioners’ offices at the division level, creating a third tier of bureaucracy, he said, adding that this had further undermined the authority of the local governments.

His counsel argued that the government had enacted the Punjab Local Government (Amendment) Act 2010 in clear violation of Articles 140-A, 2-A, 7, 9, 17, and 32 of the Constitution. He added that the dissolution of the local bodies, in February 2010, and their replacement with civil administrators was in violation of the constitution.

He requested the court to declare the amendment and the appointment of administrators as unconstitutional.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 24th, 2010.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ