Encroaching the political turf not good for democracy
the way the candidates are being questioned by the Returning Officers amounts to humiliating the politicians. While a military ruler introduced the condition of university graduation for eligibility of a candidate, thus debarring scores of politicians from contesting, the judiciary has created a new barrier of its own choice. In this case the candidates are required to clear a test with the syllabus known only to the examiners. Questions that can legitimately be asked from applicants for the job of a prayer leader are being put to those who are contesting national elections. Some ROs have made queries about history, geography, general knowledge, spellings, personal life, in fact about anything that comes to their mind. This is unacceptable. Before the forms reach a returning officer they are already vetted by over half a dozen departments. If the idea behind the scrutiny is to cleanse the system and ensure the candidate’s financial integrity this should be sufficient for a contestant to be declared eligible.
One had hoped that judiciary had understood that only democracy could save the country. The insistence on the implementation of Articles 62 and 63 which can be stretched to mean anything the interpreter wants is tantamount to opening a Pandora’s Box. This will raise the question if the country is moving towards a religious autocracy where a minority with a puritan bias would call the shots. The two Articles were the brainchild of military dictator Ziaul Haq as were several other laws that discriminated against women and minorities. The so-called ‘Islamic’ provisions have helped create an environment conducive to the spread of extremism. The ongoing exercise would further strengthen the trend. Who will determine what constitutes Islamic injunctions – the religious scholars, the Taliban, the Supreme Court or the Parliament? The yet to be defined “Pakistan ideology”, unheard of before the Yahya Khan’s infamous regime, has claimed its first victim. One wonders how many others are going to fall under the guillotine. As the experience of the French Revolution shows, once the instrument has been put to use no head is safe.
Many think the judiciary is proactively pursuing the politicians the way the Inquisition persecuted the heretics. The ECP has put all the relevant information about the candidates on the net. The vast majority of Pakistanis comprises of Muslims, albeit of a moderate type. Why doesn’t the judiciary let the millions of voters decide what kind of rulers they want? A perception is fast growing that the military dictators and judges share an unhealthy prejudice against politics and politicians. Further they also want to encroach on the political turf. This does not augur well for democracy.
