The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) Tuesday strongly reacted to the harsh criticism by the media on verification of fake degrees of parliamentarians and clarified its position and limitations as per law. The commission has noted that baseless diatribe against the Commission, in particular against its members are being disseminated in fake degree case.
The reality is that the Commission sent the Bachelor degrees of contestants annexed to their nomination papers to Higher Education Commission (HEC) for reporting their genuineness or otherwise through the concerned universities. The HEC while acting as a conduit return the nomination papers, degrees and the report of the universities along with their own report to the Commission, who after hearing the concerned Parliamentarian, in cases it came to the conclusion that prima facie case of fraud and cheating is made out transmit the case to the concerned Sessions Judges under section 94 of the Representation of the People Act, 1976 for trial through a complaint by District Election Commissioner/Regional Election Commissioner of the Election Commission or FIR registered with the Police.
The procedure is in line with the dictum of the apex court in the case of Rizwan Gill Supra. The sessions Judge, despite the time provided to him under the law does not decide the case. ECP has no jurisdiction, competence or authority to meddle in the work of any court. ECP has sent umpteen cases for trial where prima facie case of corrupt practice is made out. Sadly either this aspect has not been divulged by the informer to the reporter or intentionally good work done by the ECP has been put on the backburner. A huge misnomer is deeply ingrained in the mind of the reporter, that ECP can suspend the Parliamentarians from doing their duties or can disqualify them. Yes disqualification can be resorted to by ECP only after the Parliamentarian is convicted and penalised by a competent court of law. Calumnious outburst that PML-N leaders confirmed to the reporter that four Members were inducted on the formula of Muk-mukaw with government or Parliamentary Committee is not only rubbish but strongly denied, throwing a challenge to the reporter to name the so-called leaders.
ECP has given details about 27 parliamentarians in its earlier press release. Two parliamentarians who resigned were given clean chit by former CEC on 15th January, 2011, whereas the four members were inducted in office by administering oath to them on 13th June, 2011. Cases mentioned were consigned to record but the deviation now coming to the knowledge of the Members, fresh notices are being issued as in the case of Jamshed Dasti summoned for 13th March, 2013.
Most of the parliamentarians in the list provided have been declared prima facie guilty and their cases are pending before the courts. However, the mala fide of the reporter is manifest when he names Yar Muhammad Rind (PB-31) as one of the MNA against whom no action has been taken. Rind was recently acquitted by the apex court and his case was remitted for fresh decision to Balochistan High Court, which court earlier convicted him in absentia. How on God's earth can ECP proceed against Rind when the question of his culpability is still sub judice. ECP can provide details in each and every case vividly to the entire satisfaction of the public but it honestly feels in doing so it would be wasting its time which can be utilised for more constructive purpose being the main goal to accomplish.