Answer to Javed Chauhdry

جاوید چوہدری صاحب  کے جواب میں

کل سے غیر جانبداری کے پردے میں لپٹے لوگوں کی جاوید چوہدری کے تازہ ترین کالم پر خوشیاں اور قلابازیاں دیکھ دیکھ کر تنگ آ چکا ہوں- میں چاہتا تو نہیں تھا کہ لکھوں، نا موڈ تھا نا دلچسپی - مگر ابھی لکھنے لگا ہوں کیونکہ لگ کچھ ایسا رہا ہے کہ لوگ ان کو ضرورت سے کچھ زیادہ سنجیدگی سے لے رہے ہیں- باقی سارے کالم کو چھوڑ دیں، میں صرف ان کے اعتراضات کے جواب دوں گا- نوٹ کیجئے گا کہ مجھے جاوید چوہدری صاحب کی طرح بات کو گھمانا، پھرانا  نہیں آتا- سیدھی ٹو دا پوائنٹ بات کروں گا- اس کالم کو پڑھنے سے پیشتر آپ جاوید چوہدری صاحب کا کالم پڑھ لیں تو بہتر سمجھ پائیں گے مجھے-

ایک- آپ نے فرمایا کہ عمران خان نے ملک کے طبقہ اشرافیہ کو ایک دوسرے کے مخالف کے رتبے سے ہٹا کر ایک کر دیا اور وفاق کمزور ہو گا وغیرہ وغیرہ- یہ عمران خان کی زیادتی نہیں بہت اچھا کام ہے کہ اس نے سیاست کو مذہب، فرقے اور صوبائی تعصب سے نکال کر ایک نظرئیے کی بنیاد پر تقسیم کر دیا ہے- ایک طرف عشروں سے پاکستان پر حکومت کرنے والے اور جمہوریت کو خطرہ ہے کہہ کر عوام کو بیوقوف بنانے والے اور دوسری طرف وہ جو ارتقا کے نام پر جوہری تبدیلی سے خوفزدہ – اس چیز کو ایک انگریزی سطر میں بہت اچھا بتایا جا سکتا ہے

It is better to be divided on the basis of supporting and opposing the ideology of PTI rather than being divided on the basis of sects, ethnicities, provinces etc

دوسری چیز عوام بڑے غور سے دیکھ رہی ہے کہ کیسے ایک دوسرے کو چور، ڈاکو اور لٹیرے کہنے والے اپنے اقتدار اور مفاد کی خاطر اکھٹے ہو گئے ہیں- مستقبل قریب میں اس سے ملک مضبوط ہو گا کمزور نہیں – اور ویسے وفاق تب کمزور ہوتا ہے جب اس کی اکائیوں کو حقوق نا ملیں-

دو- آپ نے فرمایا کہ چونکہ سب دوسری سیاسی جماعتیں اکھٹی ہو چکی ہیں اس لئے آئندہ الیکشن اصلاحات مولانا فضل اور نواز شریف جیسے لوگ فرمائیں گے-عمران خان کو ساڑھے پانچ مطالبات مان کر واپس چلے جانا چاہئے- پہلی بات تو یہ کہ پہلے حکومتی اصلاحات  کا متن پڑھ لیں تا کہ آپ کو سمجھ آ جاۓ کہ دراصل ساڑھے پانچ تو کیا آدھا مطالبہ بھی نہیں ما نا گیا-دوسری بات حضور  آپ الیکشن اصلاحات کے سلسلے میں شدید غلط فہمی کا شکار ہیں-  مستقبل کس نے دیکھا ہے؟ یہ آپ کی غلط فہمی ہے کہ یہ سسٹم ایسے ہی چلتا رہے گا- ایک بار پھر انگریزی کی مدد لے کر اس کا اردو ترجمہ بھی کروں گا

Biggest Reform = Punishment to those involved in Rigging in Elections 2013

It is not the law which deters people but implementation of it which does

سب سے بڑی الیکشن اصلاحات = ان لوگوں کو سزائیں جنہوں نے گزشتہ الیکشن میں دھاندلی میں حصہ لیا

سخت سے سخت قانون بھی جرائم کی حوصلہ شکنی نہیں کر سکتا جب تک کہ اس پر عملدرآمد یقینی نا ہو

تین- آپ عمران خان سے بصد شوق اختلاف کریں، مگر اب نکو نک آئی ہوئی اس قوم سے یہ توقع مت کریں کہ آپ عمران خان پر تنقید کر کے نواز شریف جیسے لوگوں کو بہتر ثابت کرنے کی کوشش کریں تو کوئی آپ سےاختلاف نہیں کرے گا- میرے پورے جواب میں اب تک کوئی گالی نظر آئی ہے آپ کو؟ ہاں اگر آپ جھوٹ کو سچ اور سچ کو جھوٹ بنا کر پیش کریں تو ایسے منطقی ردعمل کو آپ گالی کا نام دے دیں تو جو چاہے آپ کا حسن کرشمہ ساز کرے- ویسے افسوس ہے اس شخص پر جو قتلوں کو گالیوں سے سے بہتر سمجھے- جو قوم کے ووٹ کی توہین پر تو جمہوریت خطرے میں ہے کہہ کر سادھو بن کر بیٹھا رہے مگر دھاندلی کے خلاف آواز اٹھانے والوں کو مطعون  کرے- جو وجہ(Cause) کو تو نظر انداز کر دے مگر نتیجے (Effect) کو پیٹتا رہے

چار- جتنے واقعات آپ نے بیان کئے ہیں یہ سب قوم کی بے عملی اور بزدلی کا ثبوت تھے- ایک زندہ قوم اپنے محبوب لیڈر کی قانون کے خلاف پھانسی پر کھڑی ہوتی ہے اور علم احتجاج بلند کرتی ہے- عمران خان کی اس مہم کا سب سے بڑا فائدہ یہ ہوا ہے کہ آئندہ کوئی سی ایم اقتدار کے نشے میں نہتے شہریوں کو قتل کرنے کا حکم نہیں دے گا، دھاندلی کرنے سے پہلے سو بار لوگ سوچیں گے- حضور قانون کی پابندی ہمیشہ عوام کرواتی ہے اپنے ضمیر کی آواز پر لبیک کہہ کر- آپ اسے قانون کی کمزوری سمجھتے ہیں اور میں اسے ہی قانون کی سربلندی سمجھتا ہوں کہ آئندہ جب بھی کوئی شخص قتل کر کے حکومت چلانے کی کوشش کرے گا تو نہیں کر سکے گا- اگر عمران خان دھاندلی کی شفاف انکوائری کروانے میں کامیاب ہو گیا انشا الله آئندہ الیکشن ایسا ہوگا جس میں ایک ایک ووٹ کی بائیو میٹرک طریقہ کار سے تصدیق ممکن ہو گی ورنہ اگلے الیکشن میں بھی دھاندلی کا رونا سنتے رہیں گے آپ

پانچ- آپ کے بقول عمران خان نے اسٹیبلشمنٹ کو پھر سیاست میں گھسیٹ لیا ہے- حضور عمران خان نے نہیں ان قانونی اور آئینی بزرجمہروں نے گھسیٹا ہے جو پندرہ ماہ تک عمران خان کی انتہائی شرافت سے کی گئی چار حلقے کھولنے کی ڈیمانڈ کا مذاق اڑاتے رہے اور نہیں مانے- اس کو ایک کے بعد دوسری "ٹرک دی بتی " کے پیچھے لگاتے رہے- آپ جیسے لوگوں کی وہی سوچ ہے کہ کسی کے دو بھائی قتل ہو جائیں اور ایف آئی آر تک نا کٹے تو آپ بولیں گے احتجاج مت کرو نہیں تو وہ تمھارے باقی کے چار بھائیوں کو بھی قتل کر ڈالیں گے- سلام ہے آپ کی سوچ کو حضور

چھ- آپ کے بقول عمران خان نے قوم پرستوں کو مضبوط کیا- حضور عمران خان نے ان سب کو کمزور کیا ہے اسی لئے تو یہ سب بھانت بھانت کی جماعتیں اکھٹی ہو گئی ہیں کیونکہ عمران خان نے ان لوگوں کی روزی پر لات ماری ہے جو مذھب، فرقے اور صوبائیت کی سیاست کرتے تھے- عمران خان پنجاب کا ضرور ہے مگر اس کے ساتھ سب سے ایکٹو لوگ پختون خواہ سے بھی ہیں، پنجاب سے بھی، کراچی سے بھی اور بلوچستان سے بھی- بڑے عرصے بعد پاکستان کو ایسا لیڈر نصیب ہوا ہے جس کی حیثیت قومی ہے نا کہ زرداری  اور نواز شریف کی طرح صوبائی- باقی سب لیڈر تو علاقائی بھی نہیں ہیں محض کسی تعصب پر اپنا سودا بیچتے پھرتے ہیں

سات- آپ کے بقول عمران خان نے قوم کو یہ راستہ دکھایا ہے کہ کوئی بھی شخص چند ہزار لوگوں کا جتھہ لے کر آ جاۓ، چاہے طالبان آ جائیں  اور جو مرضی منوا لے- حضور کیا آپ نے یہ کالم خود لکھا ہے؟ چلیں زیادہ نہیں بولتا پھر آپ نے گالی کا الزام لگا دینا ہے- آپ کو صرف اتنا بتا دیتا ہوں  کہ اگر الیکشن میں تمام تر دھاندلی کے باوجود اگر طالبان بھی بلحاظ ووٹ  پاکستان کی دوسری سب سے بڑی جماعت بن کر سامنے آتے ہیں  تو ان کا بھی حق ہو گا کہ وہ اپنے حقوق کے لئے پرامن انداز میں احتجاج کریں- آخر کار آئین میں یہ احتجاج کا حق قوم کو چاٹنے کے لئے تو نہیں دیا گیا نا؟ اس کا کچھ استعمال ہے !

آٹھ- آپ کے بقول عمران خان کے اس قدم کے بعد  تحریک انصاف کی مقبولیت کم ہوئی ہے –عرض ہے کہ ہم عمران خان سے خوش ہیں اور تحریک انصاف کی مقبولیت بڑھی ہے کم نہیں ہوئی- آپ کی قیمتی راۓ اور ہمدردی کا شکریہ

نو- آپ کے بقول عمران خان سمجھتے ہیں کہ صرف وہ ایماندار ہیں باقی سب چور ہیں- تو یہ آپ کی سمجھ کا قصور ہے- اور آپ پچھتر لاکھ لوگوں (دراصل کروڑوں) کے لیڈر پر بہتان لگا کر تہمت کے مرتکب  ہوۓ ہیں- آپ کو یاد کرواتا چلوں کہ ہماری قوم کی اخلاقی حالت قائداعظم کے وقت بھی وہ تھی کہ ان کو کہنا پڑا تھا میری جیب میں کھوٹے سکے ہیں-

Answer to 10 Truths by Zahid F Ebrahim

A very senior and respected writer Mr. Zahid F Ebrahim wrote a beautiful piece about 10 myths of 2013 elections. Here below you may find my humble and respectful reply to him.

1) Election tribunals have failed to decide cases — Around 410 election petitions were filed by losing candidates before the 14 election tribunals established across the country. As of last month, 292 petitions, i.e., 73 per cent of all cases, have already been decided by election tribunals. This is unprecedented when compared with the disposal rate of election tribunals in previous elections.
Answer: There is a huge difference in auditing the polling in those constituencies and dismissing the petitions on TECHNICAL basis. You could dismiss all petitions and your resolution rate would become 100%

2) Judges of election tribunals were appointed under a faulty process by a biased Election Commission of Pakistan — In previous elections, high court judges were burdened with the responsibility to decide petitions after completing their usual day’s work. Now, election tribunals are manned by retired judges, whose only work is to decide election cases. The ECP did not appoint these judges. Each of the election tribunal judges were proposed by the respective chief justices of the provincial high courts.
Answer: The author simply mentioned that 'retired judges' have been appointed this time as if it made the process correct. He should have instead focused on what exactly was the process to appoint those judges? 

3) Election tribunals are purposely going slow — It is correct that election tribunals were not able to meet the 120-day deadline to decide cases. One reason for the delay is the attitude of many losing candidates. Take for example the case of petition number 344 of 2013, Usman Dar vs Khawaja Asif. In its decision, the tribunal wrote: “The way the petitioner avoided to enter the witness box and disregarded the directions of this tribunal on the pretext of business tour abroad, provides a basis to infer that he was/is no more interested in the matter. Costs of adjournments to the tune of Rs30,000/- have not been paid by the petitioner till date. It appears that after filing the election petition, the petitioner lost interest in the election dispute and then attempted to prolong the trial … the petitioner failed to prove the allegations … (and) the election petition is found to be without any merit and is accordingly dismissed … .”
Answer: It is very easy to dismiss a petition on such technical terms as explained already in point 1 above. This is precisely what is wrong. If someone could not attend ONE hearing, does he lose the right to justice? This argument infact itself proves to be in favor of the argument that Election Tribunals are biased. 

4) If election tribunals decided the PTI’s cases, the PML-N government would collapse — The PTI candidates filed a total of 58 petitions challenging National and provincial assembly elections in various constituencies. Of these, 39 petitions, i.e., 70 per cent have already been decided by the election tribunals. Unfortunately for the PTI, none of the 39 cases were successful. Now, only 19 PTI petitions remain to be decided. Even if each of these is decided in the PTI’s favour, it will not dent the overall election result.
Answer: Even if PTI loses all seats, we are least  bothered. This is again a self-defeating argument. We want to ensure that elections were free, fair and transparent irrespective of who stays in government and who doesn't. It is not about number game, it is about fairness of the process. If elections were fair, why can't we have their audit? A simple question

5) Election tribunals are favouring the PML-N — Thus far, 10 elected parliamentarians of the PML-N have been unseated by the election tribunals. This is the highest number of decisions against any political party. Judgments in only two petitions have gone against PTI candidates. Independent candidates are the biggest winners thus far with eight cases in their favour, followed by the PPP at six.
Answer: This proves nothing. When PML-N won many seats, its losing percentage would obviously be in accordance with that. And do not forget the principle of: "Lets punish a few to make the process look credible"

6) If the government has nothing to hide, then why is it refusing to open the cases of four seats demanded by the PTI — The election results on the four National Assembly seats, i.e., NA-110, NA-122, NA-125 and NA-154 have already been opened and are subjects of judicial inquiry by the election tribunals, which are the only forum for opening disputed results of any election. The government has no role to play here.
Answer: What took Election Commission 14 months to open and decide these cases? Why not even a single of these constituences demandaed by PTI right from the start have been decided? Why? Why so much delay? Do they want to complete 5 years and then the results will be announced? How does opening up and not decising the cases for so long proves that election commission is fair? I wonder!

7) Unprecedented rigging on four seats — NA-110 was one of the four seats cited for election rigging. According to FAFEN, the number of electoral violations in NA-110 is zero. Compare this with NA-1, where Imran Khan won the election. The electoral violations here are listed as 58 by FAFEN. The point is not that the NA-1 result was manipulated simply because FAFEN listed these violations. The point is that there were approximately 90,000 polling stations across the country. Electoral law violations in some of these, deplorable as they may be, do not make these a rigged parliament.
Answer: Once again, whether Imran Khan won or lost if electoral violations occured, how many have been punished? Has the responsibility been fixed? What about thumb audit of NA 110?

8) The PML-N rigged elections to defeat the PTI’s Jahangir Tareen — NA-154 is another one of the four seats. Here, the PML-N is blamed for stealing Tareen’s victory. But it is interesting to note that the PML-N candidate here also lost the election. The winner was an independent candidate, Mohammad Siddik Baloch. If the PML-N wanted to rig this seat, why would its candidate come a distant third?
Answer: Once again, that constituency has been opened and so far gross anomalies have been found. Whether PML-N did it or someone else did it, where are the culprits? Where are the punishments?

9) Even the PPP supports the demand to reopen result of four constituencies — The PPP is happy that the PTI is focusing attention solely on Punjab. The PPP lost a large number of safe seats in Punjab. Although this has happened before, this time, the loss threatens its very existence in Punjab. In the famous four constituencies, the PPP received an abysmal one per cent, 1.6 per cent, 2.9 per cent and five per cent of total votes cast and its candidates lost even their security deposits. Therefore, how can the PPP resist the opportunity to help de-legitimise the election results in these constituencies?
Answer: PTI's major vote share was from Punjab and KPK so its natural that PTI would focus more on Punjab. Some rocket science? PPP will obviously support it because it does not affect them. How does it prove innocence of Election Commission and fairness of elections? And by the way, a PML-N candidate who was at 6th position in an NA constituency in KPK has done the same.

10) The PTI exhausted all forums provided by law before coming on the streets — The Representation of Peoples Act provides that the forum to contest election results is the election tribunals. Around 73 per cent of all cases have already been decided by them. Anyone aggrieved by their decisions can file an appeal in the Supreme Court as mandated by law. Rule of law is not just an empty slogan to be raised in public rallies and television talk shows. It is the foundation which we must abide by if we are to build a modern and stable Pakistan.
Answer: Do not hide behind legal complexities. If legal channels were so binding and necessary then why were judges not restored using the same legal channels? Why PML-N and PTI had to come on roads for their restoration? This is a question of paramount importance in a democracy: Fairness of Elections and it requires ultimate measures at any cost. If judges could be resoted out of parliament and court when judiciary was just a pillar of the democracy, why can't true democracy (which results only after fair elections) be restored using the same principle and route?

And now comes the icing on the cake:
1. Why have Forms XIV (on the basis of which results are declared) not yet been made public? Thats the primary document using which political parties verify the count and turn out with their own data tables!
2. Why were polling schemes of more than 90 constituences changed one night before elections?
3. Why was trained polling stafff replaced with untrained political staff days before elections without informing anyone?
4. These elections were conducted on the premise that there would be magnetic ink through which each thumb of voters would be verifiable. This is why many parties including PTI agreed to election and its procedures. When even that was absent and it was not even announced until PTI demanded for thumb verification, where does this whole process stand? Virtually in hell and thats precisely where this Nincompoop Govt along with Nincompoop election commission stands!
By the way, has anyone been punished so far for above very obvious and gross violations of election law?

Source Article: http://tribune.com.pk/story/743813/ten-truths-about-electoral-rigging/#.U-LNdO5Pekc.facebook

Supplementary Article with proofs from neutral bodies about election rigging: http://www.siasat.pk/forum/showthread.php?271188-Rigging-in-2013-Elections-With-Irrefutable-Proofs

Response to Rigging Article

Just received this article. Going to comment on each point logically. My comments will be separated by two rows of *****

{
"ACCUSING the PML-N, caretakers, the Election Commission and judiciary of unprecedented rigging against it in 2013, the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) is threatening a long march. Other parties have also complained of rigging though are not threatening drastic action. So, were these elections rigged?

Since politicians often employ hyperbole, one must review the reports of neutral election observers — the EU, the US-based National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the Pakistan-based Free and Fair Election Network (Fafen). While all three identified pre- and election-day flaws, none questioned overall electoral credibility."
}

*************Answer to Quoted Text*******************
None of them were given the mandate to comment on credibility of elections but rather the procedural requirements needed to be fulfilled so if the author is admitting that all 3 identified pre and election day flaws thats where their role began and thats there it ends. Mind you in this modern age of IT no one dares to do rigging blatantly rather its done discretely and systematically using the loop holes in the system so this argument to declare elections to be fair stands null and void
***********************************************************

{
"The EU and NDI, having monitored Pakistani elections for decades, actually termed overall election processes significantly improved. None reported systematic rigging against the PTI. The EU and NDI did report that the PPP and Awami National Party were not allowed by the TTP to campaign freely in KP. This ironically benefited the PTI. Thus, inferences from neutral reviews actually paint the PTI as an indirect beneficiary rather than victim of electoral flaws."
}

*************Answer to Quoted Text*******************
Factual discrepancy: This argument is as valid as the campaign of PML-N that PTI is B team of PPP. Actually all the parties who could not run their campaigns under the threat of terrorism were harmed and every other party was benefited be it PTI or PML-N or JUI(F) etc. Once again such bodies never report rigging directly. They simply hint at procedural mistakes and flaws in the system which they excessively did.
***********************************************************

{
"Data from a Fafen review of post-election complaint-handling also undermines rigging charges. Out of 410 complaints lodged with the ECP, 301 stood decided by May 31, 2014. While over 100 complaints are pending, election tribunals are not delaying PTI complaints only. If 21 of PTI’s 58 total complaints are still pending, so are 28 of PML-N’s 66. The PTI had zero success rate to-date in its 37 decided complaints; the PML-N only had four successes in 38 decided complaints. Tribunals have de-seated two PTI but also nine PML-N winners to-date. There appears to be little evidence that the tribunals are biased."
}

*************Answer to Quoted Text*******************
Major problem is not with whether tribunals are biased or no. Major problem is the procedure and the system of these tribunals and the delay they cause in results. 
**********************************************************
{
"Rigging evidence should be submitted to the courts.
Even if the PTI miraculously wins all of its remaining complaints, it would not gain power in Punjab or nationally. Even if the PML-N loses all complaints pending against it, it will retain power in both places. So, the alleged rigging has not tipped things decisively. There is a wide gap between PTI’s massive rigging rhetoric and available evidence. Such limited rigging provides no justification for launching long marches which could topple democracy."
}

*************Answer to Quoted Text*******************
Sorry to say a very lame argument from a person of caliber of a Doctor. Even if rigging occurred on only one seat of PML-N, it must be reported, identified, the responsible fixed and system improved for future. I will come to the justifications and reasons for long march in my last argument.
**********************************************************

{
"Even if democracy survives and the PTI forces early elections, there is no guarantee that it will win. Even if it wins, it may reintroduce ruinous 1990s-type politics as the PML-N may then attempt to topple the PTI early. Despite all its faults, the PML-N respected the PTI’s 2013 KP mandate even though it could have cobbled a majority there. The PTI must reciprocate graciously or risk undermining the good things it is planning in KP governance-wise."
}

*************Answer to Quoted Text*******************
a. We do not want win of PTI or PML-N or any party for that matter
b. We want fair, transparent and free elections which can be challenged and verified by anybody at any time. Such a system should be in place
c. If PML-N had guts, they could accept the most troubled province of Pakistan KPK. Fact is that they avoided direct responsibility in all provinces except Punjab. Its a coward approach and actually harmful for federation.
d. You can not ignore killing of someone by saying "mitti pao", lets don't punish those who killed otherwise they might kill more. You actually need to punish the killers and then ensure that it does not happen again! What kind of twisted logic is being presented in this article?
***********************************************************

{
"If the party has strong rigging evidence, it should submit it to the courts. If it feels that they are biased against it, before taking drastic measures like quitting assemblies and invading Islamabad, it should convince neutral civil society elements, eg bar associations, human rights groups, media, and other major opposition parties about its stand. It should not appear as judge, jury and executioner all alone."
}

*************Answer to Quoted Text*******************
They have submitted everything to courts, media, civil society and the writer seems to be living in a world of his own to not know what ACTUALLY is opinion of all the groups mention by this gentleman. The party is not appearing as Judge, Jury and Executioner all alone. In fact they have been disappointed badly by Judge, Jury and Executioner all alone. I will explain in the last comment HOW
**********************************************************

{
"Democracies allow legitimate protest. But, not even advanced democracies allow protest by people (like Qadri) planning overtly to topple elected governments unconstitutionally. PTI promises legal protests only for achieving poll reforms. But it hints of a premature end to PML-N rule. Such premature end, genuine reforms and constitutionalism are not all possible together given the enormity of required electoral reforms."
}

*************Answer to Quoted Text*******************
Democracies allow peaceful PROTEST my friend. Nowhere in constitution is written the word legitimate or otherwise else no government will ever allow any kind of protest declaring it to be NOT legitimate. If your legal rights and due demands are not heard then it is government which is to be blamed for outcomes not opposition. Who decides whether protests are legitimate or no? Public opinion. If government is delivering, keeping up its election promises all such protests die down at their own. If however things are fishy at the end of government itself, they die. It is natural in democracies. In fact the right to protest for any reason is given precisely to cater for possibility of armed and bloody struggle otherwise. Winning an election does not give any government a license to kill for 5 years. They still have to listen to public and opposition!
***********************************************************

These include rules and mechanisms for time-barred disqualification of convicts and government defaulters; better mechanisms for appointing ECP members, interim governments and returning officers; constituency delimitation and voter list re-verification based on a new census, and stronger election day processes like electronic voter identification and voting and associated voter education etc. Poll reforms need two to three years to complete.

The PTI can only have any two of the three outcomes mentioned above together. If it chooses the early end of PML-N rule and constitutionalism, reforms are not possible since elections will become due in three months under a PML-PPP-appointed interim government. Secondly, if it chooses an early end to PML-N rule and reforms, it would mean an unconstitutional interim government institutes reforms over two to three years. Finally, it could choose reforms and constitutionalism by foregoing an early end of PML-N rule and pressuring it together with other political and civic groups to institute reforms over the next four years.

This is the sensible choice that genuine democrats should select. The PTI must publicly announce its commitment to assemblies completing their terms. This will help it gain the support of numerous political and civic groups currently wary of its intentions. Even if initially reluctant, the PML-N will be unable to resist their combined reform demands coupled with judicial pressure.

************************ Last Comment *********************
Everything else is similar kind of rhetoric of if, then, this, that, else and so on. I will now summarize the situation with simple and proven facts + figures.

1. 114 returning officers have not yet made form XIV (A primary document) public even after 14 months of elections without which result of any constituency can not be declared.

2. Magnetic ink was part of the most important rules of Elections 2013. It was NOT used and it was NOT informed or announced until PTI requested for thumb verification. This is a clear case of possible ill intentions.

3. A total of 93 constituencies were changed just days before elections, why?

4. If everything is fair, transparent and free, why so much reluctance in opening four constituencies? Why can't PML-N give proof of its maturity, experience and commitment to democracy by opening these constituencies and allow their thumb verification for the sake of democracy?

5. Last but not the least, no matter how stringent rules and criteria you make, if the offenders of a law know that they will never be questioned or caught later on, no rule, no system and no law can stop the rigging. So for above mentioned anomalies the responsible must be punished. I am not concerned about whether demands of PTI are right or wrong. But I see them as an opportunity to expose the flaws in the system, punish the culprits and block the passage of future violations of law!

Source Article: http://www.dawn.com/news/1117319/unfair-polls

Total Pageviews

Popular Posts