Catch-22 situation: For Sindh and Punjab, PPP adopts separate stances

PPP Sindh requested by judicial commission to submit reply against allegations of vote corruption

ISLAMABAD:  

As the judicial commission announced that it would be poring over evidence to determine whether or not general elections were rigged, the main opposition Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) found itself in a catch-22-like situation.

Apparently, the Punjab chapter of the PPP is striving hard to expose rigging in the province, while the party has been directed by the judicial commission to submit its reply to the rigging allegations levelled against it in Sindh. It is not clear yet how the Sindh chapter of the party would respond to this move.

However, Aitzaz Ahsan, arguing on behalf of the PPP, requested the commission to provide him copies of the allegations levelled against the party so that he could frame a response.

The PPP would not give any evidence of rigging to the judicial commission and it would only reply to the evidence of other parties except those which will implicate PPP in the rigging process particularly in Sindh province.

Besides Aitzaz, former Senate chairman Nayyer Bokhari and former Punjab governor Sardar Latif Khosa are also part of the PPP’s legal team.

Senator Aitzaz Ahsan of the PPP has requested the commission to reopen polling bags of some 65 constituencies of the National Assembly from the Punjab province to determine the pattern of rigging and consequences to be faced if statuary and mandatory documents have been destroyed by the returning officers, as had emerged during NA-125 constituency’s verdict.

Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk warned Aitzaz Ahsan against citing that constituency in the commission’s proceedings. The commission also sought the ruling party’s lawyer Shahid Hamid’s response on the PPP’s request to which Hamid opposed Aitzaz Ahsan’s request. He protested it would be one-way traffic and asked “Why only Punjab?” asked the ruling party’s counsel and then suggested that the commission select constituencies from different parts of the country. He suggested that as a sample for this exercise those constituencies where MQM and PPP’s candidates won during 2013 elections should be included. The matter of selection of the constituencies should not be left to Aitzaz or PTI, Hamid said. “Only the judicial commission can select such constituencies’ subject of my legal objections on this move,” Hamid added.

Following consultations with two other members of the commission, the chief justice announced that they were going to examine the witnesses first and then will decide this proposal filed by PPP. The commission will also decide the question of whether this exercise should be carried out only in the Punjab or should other provinces be observed in a similar pattern.

The commission also deferred the plan of issuing notices to the relevant officials on the application filed by Aitzaz. During the proceedings the PPP would rely on the evidence of all other parties including PTI to which Justice Amir Hani Muslim quipped, “You can also rely on your own evidence.” Aitzaz did not give any justification as to why he would not be submitting his own authored ‘white paper’ on rigging in the 2013 general elections.