Govt, PTI talks: Deadlock persists over definition of rigging

Negotiation teams to meet again on Saturday to finalise ToRs as PTI warns any further delay will be counterproductive


Web Desk December 26, 2014

ISLAMABAD: Deadlock between government and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf persisted on Friday as the negotiation teams of both parties failed to reach consensus over the definition of rigging, Express News reported.

After their meeting at the PTI leader Jahangir Tareen's residence on Friday evening, government’s lead negotiator, Finance Minister Ishaq Dar said that consensus could not be reached on three clauses.

“We deliberated over the observation, clause by clause, and both parties agreed on the draft proposal, except for three clauses. We will hold another meeting tomorrow [Saturday] and will hopefully overcome the differences and reach on a positive conclusion.”

Both sides had agreed to form a judicial commission through an ordinance to probe the May 2013 elections. However, the government and the PTI have yet to finalise the terms of references for the commission.

“We will meet tomorrow, with good intentions, and will try to reach consensus,” said PTI vice chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi.

He added that the kind of flexibility that the PTI, and its chairman Imran Khan, have shown in recent days, they were expecting that government will show similar flexibility.

“In my honest opinion, if there is any further delay in this agreement, then it will not reach its logical conclusion,” he warned.

According to Express News correspondent Sohail Chaudhry, negotiations between PTI and government ended without any resolution on Friday as both parties failed to reach to an agreement over the status unverified votes as both sides try to finalise the terms of references for probing the May 2013 elections.

Government is of the opinion that if a large number of unverifiable votes are discovered during the audit of 2013 general elections, it will be termed a ‘conspiracy.’ The PTI’s stance is that if such votes are discovered, it would be called rigging.

PTI further alleged that the government has removed some clauses from the ordinance which would pave the way for a Judicial Commission to audit the 2013 polls. PTI and the government had agreed to form a judicial commission through an ordinance.

Another point of contention between the parties is that, if the judicial commission finds that the elections were rigged, how its decision will be implemented since Article 225 of the Constitution will pose a hurdle.

Under article 225, election disputes can only be resolved by an election tribunal.

Article 225 reads, “No election to a House or a Provincial Assembly shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such tribunal and in such manner as may be determined by Act of 1[Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)].”

COMMENTS (20)

H Chaudhry | 9 years ago | Reply

@Usman Sure go ahead and try to put PMLN in trash and see what happens! Point is that there are very many people that support this party including myself so you should not try to tell me that you can throw my party in trash when I am sitting here to protect it. System is not corrupt, people are corrupt. System is not bad, people are bad, people like generals who run over Governments in midnight, dont let institutions grow, take 30% of budget and yet lose every war or people like mullah canada who pay people to revolt etc etc. System will be fine when institutions will grow and that will only happen in stability. 2018 is not too far get out and put PMLN to trash by voting and i will get out and vote as well and we will see who has more.

Usman | 9 years ago | Reply

Just like we have declared war on terrorism, & hatred. We need to declare a war on Corruption & Nepotism, there is no room for that in 21st century Pakistan, we should start with ruling parties & their supporters as they are so keen to maintain this corrupt,and dirty system.

VIEW MORE 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