[DAWN] Just before the 'azadi march', the prime minister announced the government's intention to establish a commission, consisting of Supreme Court judges, to inquire into allegations by Pakistain Tehrik-e-Insaf...a political party in Pakistan. PTI was founded by former Pakistani cricket captain and philanthropist Imran Khan. The party's slogan is
Justice, Humanity and Self Esteem, each of which is open to widely divergent interpretations....
(PTI) that the 2013 elections were rigged. The hope was that this would defuse the political crisis engulfing the country. Yet, the proposed 'solution' comes with its own set of problems.
First, an issue that could have led to strengthening of the political process will end up weakening it. When the allegations were first levelled, PML-N decided not to engage politically at all, stating that only election tribunals were an appropriate forum for these allegations. Yet, 14 months later — facing calls for resignation — suddenly an alternate forum has been conceived.
Instead, if at the very beginning the PML-N had engaged with PTI, they could have secured a guarantee that the overall election would not be questioned, that the findings from the four constituencies would be used to guide electoral reform and thus the political process would have produced meaningful outcomes. Yet now, once again, the Supreme Court has been asked to wade into a complete political thicket.
Second, the question that the court is being asked to answer is crucial. The court is not being asked whether there was rigging in the elections of 2013. It is being asked whether the 'allegations' levelled by the PTI that the elections were 'manipulated or influenced by anyone for the benefit of a political party or individuals' are true.
In other words, please tell us if it is correct that your former chief justice, former judge Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, and former caretaker chief minister Najam Sethi etc were in cahoots with the PML-N. The Supreme Court will either have to implicate a former chief justice — who led the court for eight years and aggressively heard cases against a PPP government — as being a partisan person willing to rig elections; or it will have to exonerate them.
Given this background, even if they exonerate them, the PTI and its supporters will be able to claim that the court had its own interests to protect. It is a political thicket that will only tarnish the court.
Third, even if the terms of reference are changed so that the court is asked to inquire whether rigging took place and not the alleged role of people who may have influenced the elections, there are constitutional issues.