Crude Senate satire
The immediate dust may have settled following the victory of the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf’s (PTI’s) candidates for Senate Chairman and Deputy Chairman, but this saga is far from over. Sadiq Sanjrani, the outgoing Chairman and PTI candidate, won by 48 votes to his Pakistan Democratic Party (PDM) rival Yousaf Raza Gilani’s 42 in a house of 98 voters, the Jamaat-i-Islami’s sole Senator having abstained and the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz’s (PML-N’s) elected senator Ishaq Dar not having taken oath. However, the result immediately produced an outcry by the opposition since presiding officer Senator Muzaffar Hussain Shah rejected seven votes for Gilani on the grounds that the stamp on their ballots was affixed on Gilani’s name rather than the space in front of it. An eighth ballot was rejected because the stamp was affixed on both candidates’ names. Had the seven Gilani votes not been rejected, he would have won by a narrow margin of 49-48. Interestingly, after Sanjrani took his oath of office despite the opposition’s loud protests and presided over the election of Deputy Chairman, the PTI’s candidate, Mirza Mohammad Afridi won by 54 votes to the PDM’s Maulana Abdul Ghafoor Haideri’s 44. While the victory of Sanjrani can easily be traced to the seven rejected votes, Afridi’s clear margin of 10 is not as easy to explain. The common factor in both cases is seven votes, rejected in the case of the Chairman’s election, and possibly cast for the government’s candidate in the Deputy Chairman’s election. The opposition is discussing a legal challenge to Shah’s ruling in the courts, citing a body of case law laid down by the higher courts holding that the intent of the voter, if it can be clearly determined, cannot be shot down on a mere technicality. On the other hand, the argument by legal experts goes that parliament’s proceedings cannot be challenged in any court of law. The question to be adjudicated by the courts therefore will be whether the Senate elections fall within the purview of parliamentary proceedings or, since the Senate becomes an electoral college for the purposes of electing a Chairman and Deputy Chairman, any irregularities in this process are open to legal review. It may be mentioned in passing that the discovery of hidden cameras in the polling booth just before votes were cast has created yet another controversy as to who was responsible for this surreptitious act. Shah announced an inquiry committee with three members from each side to conduct an investigation into this skullduggery.
While the victory has elevated the government badly rattled by Yousaf Raza Gilani winning the Islamabad Senate seat against Hafeez Shaikh, which they countered by Prime Minister Imran Khan taking a vote of confidence from the National Assembly, the victory may prove pyrrhic. It is, however, important to note that the number of Hafeez’s rejected votes had exceeded Gilani’s victory margin! Apart from the legal challenge, the PDM may be forced to more seriously consider the streets rather than parliament as the political battleground. The PDM has already announced a “long march” on Islamabad on March 26, and we may witness in the days ahead a greater concentration on organising that event. Further, given the parlous state of relations between the treasury and opposition benches, it remains to be seen if the government will be able, as is its stated desire, to pass meaningful legislation through the Senate with a narrow and possibly uncertain majority. Joint sessions of both houses could offer a way out of this conundrum, but frequent resort to these could create further difficulties. To say that the shenanigans in recent days surrounding the Senate elections have saddened thinking people about the state of our democracy would be a huge understatement. Although allegations of dirty tricks are routine regarding the upper house’s elections, some new records may have been set in this round. For one, the PTI may have won the elections, but has lost the moral high ground on which it perched with its anti-corruption narrative. The opposition too stands tainted with charges of using money to swing electoral verdicts its way. The role of the establishment, cloaked as it is in a thick veil of secrecy, continues to trouble those desirous of the country finally seeing a credible, transparent, democratic system functioning as it should.
No comments:
Post a Comment