‘Incomplete’ electoral rolls: Court questions federal, Sindh govts on by-polls

By-elections on four provincial assembly seats on Feb 18.


Our Correspondent January 23, 2013
PHOTO: APP/FILE

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) has called for comments from the federal and provincial governments on the legality of by-elections without voter verification.

On December 5 last year, the Supreme Court observed that the electoral rolls in Karachi needed to be revised and the election commission was directed to launch a door-to-door campaign to verify voters with the army’s help.

By-polls on four provincial assembly seats in Karachi - PS-101, PS-103, PS-113 and PS-115 - are scheduled for February 18. The election commission’s decision has, however, been challenged in court by six petitioners, who claim to be registered voters of these constituencies. Abdul Sami and five others cited the chief election commissioner, provincial election commissioner and Sindh chief secretary as respondents.



Since the voter verification is still underway, it is unclear if the by-elections would be held in accordance with the “updated electoral rolls” or not, Abid S. Zuberi, the petitioners’ lawyer, said. And as new electoral rolls have not been prepared, polling cannot be conducted as per the apex court’s order, he argued.

Zuberi appealed to the court to set aside the election commission notification to hold the elections in February.

Thatta by-election

Another petition against the by-election on PS-84 Thatta-I seat also came up for hearing on Wednesday. Zafar Ali Shah had challenged the by-poll, arguing the exercise would be a waste of time and money since any elected representative would not be able to serve the people for more than five weeks. The bench headed by Chief Justice Mushir Alam called for comments from the federal and provincial governments by January 29.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 24th, 2013.

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