This refers to Kamran Rehmat’s enlightening article “Screwtiny” in your issue of April 15. I agree with his very acute observations regarding the on-going process of scrutiny of the aspiring candidates for MNA/MPA slots by the Returning Officers. Needless to comment that the process adopted had much to be desired. I would like to add the following observations. Firstly, as pointed out by the embarrassed candidates some of the questions put forth by the worthy ROs had no relevance to the Sections 62 and 63 of the constitution. It appeared that they wanted to belittle the politicians just to score points/settle some grudge?
Secondly, the ROs most probably deviated and/or overstepped the mandate so given by the ECP. Thirdly, some of the ROs seemed to be not so competent or one may say not so qualified to effectively carry out the task. Fourthly, many a politician was not asked the pinching questions (may be due to some pressure or lack of knowledge) which if asked could have disqualified them.
And finally, the aspirants went into appeal and most of them were cleared due to insufficient evidence produced by the ROs. Being the first experiment of its kind one can take it as a good effort. But we may have to devise better procedures/rules to judge the potential MNAs/MPAs next time.
RASHID MAQSOOD
Lahore