Criteria ‘Sadiq’ or ‘Ameen’: Musharraf challenges SHC verdict in top court
Files a petition in SC against disqualification to contest elections.
General Pervez Musharraf. PHOTO: AFP
ISLAMABAD:
Challenging the Sindh High Court (SHC) verdict regarding his disqualification from contesting elections, former military ruler Pervez Musharraf on Thursday requested the Supreme Court (SC) that the terms in question used in Article 62(1)(f) (Sadiq and Ameen) should be struck down as being un-implementable, vague, overbroad and ambiguous.
The SHC had questioned Musharraf’s credentials for invoking emergency rule in 2007 and held that he lacked the qualification to be elected as a legislator. It had observed that Musharraf could not be called ‘Sadiq’ or ‘Ameen’ under the criteria laid down in Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution. Article 62(1)(f) says: “A person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament) unless, if he is sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and Ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law.”
Musharraf has filed a petition against the SHC February 14 verdict making the Election Commission of Pakistan, Election Tribunal for Karachi, Sindh, Returning Officer (RO) and federation of Pakistan as respondents.
The petition states that no mechanism has been provided in either the Constitution or any of the subordinate legislations via which the Returning Officer or for that matter the election tribunal can conclude whether or not a person possesses the qualifications referred to Article 62(1)(f).
It is also said that this lack of guideline leaves the Returning Officer (and subsequent forums) with no option but to improvise and formulate their own methods and procedure for adjudicating the various cases which come before them.
The ex-general stated that in his case, RO did not lead any evidence and only relied on a decision of the SC to come to his conclusion. The petition says that judgment of the apex court passed in the Sindh High Court Bar Association case cannot be construed as determination of the issue that the petitioner (Musharraf) is liable under Article 6 of the Constitution.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 5th, 2015.
Challenging the Sindh High Court (SHC) verdict regarding his disqualification from contesting elections, former military ruler Pervez Musharraf on Thursday requested the Supreme Court (SC) that the terms in question used in Article 62(1)(f) (Sadiq and Ameen) should be struck down as being un-implementable, vague, overbroad and ambiguous.
The SHC had questioned Musharraf’s credentials for invoking emergency rule in 2007 and held that he lacked the qualification to be elected as a legislator. It had observed that Musharraf could not be called ‘Sadiq’ or ‘Ameen’ under the criteria laid down in Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution. Article 62(1)(f) says: “A person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament) unless, if he is sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and Ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law.”
Musharraf has filed a petition against the SHC February 14 verdict making the Election Commission of Pakistan, Election Tribunal for Karachi, Sindh, Returning Officer (RO) and federation of Pakistan as respondents.
The petition states that no mechanism has been provided in either the Constitution or any of the subordinate legislations via which the Returning Officer or for that matter the election tribunal can conclude whether or not a person possesses the qualifications referred to Article 62(1)(f).
It is also said that this lack of guideline leaves the Returning Officer (and subsequent forums) with no option but to improvise and formulate their own methods and procedure for adjudicating the various cases which come before them.
The ex-general stated that in his case, RO did not lead any evidence and only relied on a decision of the SC to come to his conclusion. The petition says that judgment of the apex court passed in the Sindh High Court Bar Association case cannot be construed as determination of the issue that the petitioner (Musharraf) is liable under Article 6 of the Constitution.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 5th, 2015.