RIPPLE EFFECT
One-sided and unnecessary
By Omar R. Quraishi
The move by the Election Commission of Pakistan to issue a notification which exempts President Pervez Musharraf from Article 63 of the Constitution is totally unnecessary and shows that the commission cannot be expected to act independently in the coming general and presidential election. Article 63 requires that any individual who has been working in the service of the government can only contest an election to public office after a gap of two years and the EC move effectively paves the way for the president to present himself as a candidate for re-election.

return
It will be a different day

Benazir Bhutto's announcement of her return on the heel of the presidental election is being met with, both joy and raised eyebrows

By Aoun Sahi

On September 15, five days after the forced re-exile of Mian Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) announced the return of Benazir Bhutto on 18 October, after more than 8 years self exile.

PPP announced her return in an aggressive and well-planned way Announcing it simultaneously from five major cities of country, Azad Kashmir, Fata and Northern Areas. The leaders read out a message of Benazir in the press conferences in which she declared that there had been negotiations with the regime but no agreement was reached. "In this difficult hour through which the nation is passing, I want to be with the people of Pakistan to take them out of the present difficult times," the message read.

Many people are apprehensive of PPP's stance. According to political analysts and leaders of opposition parties, both Musharraf and Benazir have reached to an agreement, and that is the reason Benazir has announced her return. According to them, the deal includes that Benazir will create no hurdle in the re-election of Musharraf for another five years, while in return she will get a string of gradual concessions, include getting cleared of all corruption charges, a share in the care-taker government and removing legal hurdles to become prime minister for the third time.

PPP President,Makhdoom Amin Fahim, refute these allegations "Benazir is coming after having a deal with the people of Pakistan, we need their support."

Interestingly, Benazir's date of return is days after the presidential elections -- expected to be held before October 15 and her opponents are blaming that this means, giving an open field to Musharraf.

Amin Fahim says that the PPP has nothing to do with the presidential election. "We have chosen the date according to our own priorities and Benazir has announced her return before the general election" He also says that it will not be easy for the government to stop Benazir in the same fashion it deported Nawaz Sharif "because the PPP workers are ready to face the government."

It is being said that Benazir's decision to land at the Karachi airport is also part of the deal because the MQM is also eager to support and back Musharraf.It is also being said that a representative of the MQM, Dr Ishratul Ibad, governor of Sindh, was also present in the Abu Dhabi meeting and he assured Benazir of full co-operation. Other reasons given to land in Karachi are that Sindh is a stronghold of the PPP and the PPP Sindh chapter is also more active than any other PPP provincial organization. The Karachi airport is also surrounded by localities that strongly support the PPP, and its leaders hope that most of them will come out to greet their leader.

The government's stance also supports that some compromise has been reached between both parties. The government officials say that Benazir will not suffer the fate of Nawaz Sharif on her return.

"Nawaz Sharif's case is different. He went back to Saudi Arabia because of having an undertaking with Saudis to stay away from Pakistan for 10 years" said Tariq Azim, state minister for information. He says that Benazir is allowed to come back "but everybody is equal in front of law and she also will have to face cases against her."

He admits that the government and Benazir are in talks to find out a way forward for the sake of the country. "But at present, Musharraf's talks with Bhutto are snagged over her want for the corruption cases to be dropped against her and for a constitutional amendment to let her become as prime minister for the third time." Tariq also tells TNS that there are differences between Musharraf and Benazir over the president's re-election bid.

Opposition parties are not ready to believe these statements. Chauhdry Ahsan Iqbal, information secretary PML-N says that his party believes that all the leaders should be given the right to return to the country. "We fail to understand why the selective application is being done by allowing one and not others."

According to Ahsan Iqbal, a year back, Musharraf was saying that both Nawaz Sharif and Benazir will not be allowed to return. "but if Benazir will not be treated like Nawaz Sharif, it clearly shows that something has been done between them.".

He says that Musharraf is in power after the July 20 scenario mostly because of PPP "they do it because US does not want to see Musharraf destabilized." .

Ahsan thinks that Benazir's act has totally changed the PPP's anti-establishment image. He says, according to certain political analysts Benazir thinks that his father was hanged because of having bad terms with the US and the Army and if she wants to be in power she should not do that again. "She got the government in 1988, after having a deal with the army. During the 1993 long march against Nawaz Sharif's government she also toed the army's line and now again she is having meetings with the army to come into power. Benazir claims that she is doing it for democracy, this was what MMA said during the 17th amendment process."

PPP leaders admit in private that Benazir's return is the outcome of some mutual arrangement with Musharraf. They say that the military ruler and the PPP leadership want to keep their deal secret till the last moment, by this, buying valuable time to extort more and more political benefits. PPP leaders say under these arrangements the PPP will possibly form the government at the centre with the PML-Q, and in Sindh will accommodate MQM. Punjab, according to them, will be decided according to electoral performance of both parties and the party in majority will form government in Punjab.

Sajjad Bukhari, central deputy information secretary PPP, says that anti-democracy forces have launched a vilification campaign against the PPP. "When Asif Zardari was released by the Supreme Court, people said that this was the outcome of a deal but the same Supreme Court has released Javed Hashmi and nobody raises any doubt on that." He says that most of the parties of APDM are talking about the 'deal' just to shed aside the outcomes of deals they have done to strengthen Musharraf. "In the very first place Nawaz Sharif cut a deal with Musharraf and gave him a free hand for ten years. MMA did the same and passed the 17th amendment, while Imran Khan supported Musharraf's presidential referendum and got monitory benefits for his hospital."

According to Bukhari, it was decided a year back that Benazir will land in Sindh. "The PPP Sindh chapter is of the view that Punjab showed its strength in 1986 and they should be given chance to show theirs now." He says that October 18 will be an even better show than 1986 and Benazir can never be treated like Nawaz Sharif because she has a very strong following while Nawaz Sharif has no base in the people. According to him PPP will never support Musharraf's re-election as president. "PPP can also resign from Assemblies but we are not in favor to show our cards before time."

The question that still remains is how the regime will deal Bhutto on her return. One thing is obvious, PPP unlike PML-N or any other party is capable to motivate people onto the roads. PPP also has thousands of diehard workers who can go to any extent for the sake of their leadership and October 18 will be a totally different day than September 10.

A day of mourning

Maulana Hassan Jan's killing has added another one to the list of high profile unresolved murders in the province

By Javed Aziz Khan

The Frontier province officially observed September 16, the day of Maulana Hassan's funeral, as a day of mourning. The shops in cantonment where he used to deliver Friday sermon were completely closed. The spacious Qayyum Stadium proved small to accommodate one of the biggest crowd gathered for the funeral of the Maulana.

The roads leading to the gigantic stadium were completely packed with people who had come from all over the country to catch a last glimpse of the late Maulana. The intelligence gathering agencies put the number of participants of the funeral prayer well over 150,000, a gathering that was not even seen in the largely attended funerals of ANP leader Khan Abdul Wali Khan or of the popular former NWFP Governor, General Fazle Haq.

NWFP Chief Minister Akram Khan Durrani, Speaker Bakht Jehan and a number of ministers were among those in attendance who could not control their emotions and were seen wiping their tears while offering the last rituals of the Maulana.

Around 1200 policemen and FC personnel were deployed for security purpose during the funeral of the late Maulana but they failed to stop thousands of the angry admirers of the deceased from attacking the Federal Interior Minister Aftab Ahmad Khan Sherpao and Chief Minister Akram Khan Durrani.

Police commandoes had to rush out to save both of them, when the participants of the funeral turned violent on seeing the two top government officials. "I respect the deceased from the core of my heart and that was why I was there to attend his funeral. What happened during the funeral was against the Pakhtun norms," said Aftab Ahmad Khan Sherpao who paid rich tributes to the late religious scholar for his services in different fields, saying he was among those who supported the Maulana in his election as MNA in 1990.

Maulana Hassan Jan was elected MNA by defeating ANP leader Khan Abdul Wali Khan. Khan announced retirement from politics after his defeat. Later Maulana Hassan Jan also resigned, arguing his political position was hampering his religious activities.

'Who shot dead the Maulana?' is the biggest question that could be answered by the police and intelligence agencies. "Maulana was taken along by three bearded men to solemnise the nikah of one of their relatives in Qissa Khwani. They were not known to any of us but our brother had seen them. Later, we heard that our father had been shot dead in Wazir Bagh," said Maulana Fakhrul Hassan, son of the deceased. Maulana Hassan normally used to write down names and addresses of those with whom he would go out in a notebook, but to the surprise of many, nothing has been mentioned in the notebook about the three people who took him just 45 minutes before he was killed.

Maulana Hassan Jan was known to be moderate. He was well educated, had a masters degree with a gold medal from the University of Peshawar and another one from Madina University in Saudi Arabia.

The Maulana had a clear stance over the suicide attacks. The Maulana had issued a decree during the ulema convention in Peshawar in which he had termed the suicide attacks on law enforcers or against anyone in the country as un-Islamic. There were rumours that he had received threats from militants over issuing the decree but his son Ubaidur Rahman denied any threat to his father.

Despite having a soft corner for Taliban and their commander in chief Mullah Omar, the Maulana considered Osama Bin Laden a non-serious person. He made efforts in the past to ensure the start of Ramzan and observance of Eid on the same day across the country in which he succeeded this year when a regional committee headed by him announced that the first of Ramzan would fall on a Friday; the same day announced by the Central Ruet-e-Hilal Committee. The Maulana also played an important role on the issue of Lal Masjid, Waziristan imbroglio, the Taliban issue in Afghanistan and many other religious matters.

The ANP president Asfandyar Wali Khan, whose father announced retirement from politics after being defeated by the late Maulana, termed the murder as an act of anti-state elements. "He was a great leader who served Islam and the nation. The government should arrest his killers at the earliest," said Asfandyar Wali.

"The loss is irreparable. Maulana was a great religious scholar and political leader who proved to be an icon for politicians,", said Pir Sabir Shah, former NWFP Chief Minister and PML-N provincial president. He criticised the government for the poor law and order situation, saying if the government can provide guards to union council nazims, why wasn't security provided to a religious leader like Maulana Hassan Jan? He said that the cold-blooded murder of Maulana is a great loss to the Muslim world.

The arrest of his killers and due punishment to them could decrease the grief of his followers provided the case did not go into cold storage like many other high-profile incidents in the recent past.

Taal Matol
Campus!

By Shoaib Hashmi

The great university towns of Oxford and Cambridge both lie on the banks of rivers, Cambridge on the river Cam, and Oxford, I think on the Thames, where it was shallow enough for oxen to cross or ford it; so it could just as easily have been Camford and Oxbridge. And they were both built in medieval times when people didn't think much of these mealy mouthed scholars and bleeding heart students who had descended on them, and many a battle was fought between the students and the townspeople, called 'Town vs Gown' battles. The only kind of public building they knew how to build then was a church, and most of the colleges in the two towns do look like churches, with gothic towers and steeples and things.

With us the tradition was that a school was almost always attached to the local mosque. The kids got their religious education there, and learnt the rest in a quadrangle adjacent to it next door. Some of these buildings grew into magnificent edifices, called madrasas and can still be seen all over the Middle East. One madrasa is still there, next to the Moti Masjid in the Lahore Fort, and one can easily imagine hordes of kids sitting in the verandah that goes round the quadrangle.

Then the British came and brought their own version of 'Model' schools, and also colleges; like they built the  Government College in Lahore. They took over an old chapel and the surrounding grounds, which became the college gymnasium, and then built the college proper nearby. It is modelled after the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, with a tall church steeple which serves as the clock tower, and sloping slate roof over the hall, and a lovely ground in front called 'The Oval.'

Of course it does not quite match Cambridge where all the medieval gothic towers overlook the river Cam, and if you are punting on the river with the weeping willows the scenery is quite unmatched. That in turn does not match Cornell University in upstate New York which has a blooming river running through the campus, with two waterfalls! It is really a large stream or rivulet and cataracts, but even so.

On the other hand the London School of Economics sits right in the middle of town, in a narrow lane called Houghton Street, and when they grew bigger and wanted to expand there was nowhere to go. So it has been the practice for fifty years to acquire any building adjacent to, or across the narrow street, and connect the lot with bridges laid across the third or fifth floor.

Back here, came the prosperity of the nineties, thousands of colleges took over pokey private houses, and made them into make-shift colleges; while well-heeled citizens bought up agricultural land away in the suburbs, on Burki road and Harike road, and built themselves 'Farm Houses' -- and that gave the better colleges an idea. They too got cheap land on the roads leading out of town, and started making themselves custom built campuses

First the Lahore School of Economics got the sprawling housing colony an engineering firm had built for its workers while they were building the new Lahore Airport. They had huge sheds and workshops which became the gymnasium and the cafeteria; and the cute thing is that the senior professors got lovely three bedroom chalets for their offices.

Then the Beaconhouse National University acquired land near a village with the lovely name of 'Tarogil' and and they decided to retain it for the name of their campus. Then, being arty types from the School of Visual Arts, continued by taking over a factory next door, and moved in to convert the buildings while the new campus was being built. They turned one factory building into the art studio but still call it the 'Chilli Factory' and another into the sculpture studio, which was, and remains 'The 'Chicken Coop'!

I believe some of the larger schools too have built themselves, or are building themselves huge sprawling campuses, in or around all the new fangled 'towns' whose names I can neither remember nor call apart. But I am all for it, partly we had always looked with envy on the Forman Christian College which started right in the middle of Nila Gumbad, and then moved to acres of green lawns at their new campus on the canal, with a swimming pool and staff colonies spread over miles.

analysis
The fig leaf

Neither the return of Benazir nor that of Sharif poses a serious threat to the survival of Gen Musharraf. His nemesis is the apex court that has been assertive of its authority since the judicial crisis

By Adnan Adil

PPP chairperson Ms Benazir Bhutto's announcement to land in Karachi on October 18 is significant both for its timing and the choice of place for disembarkation. She will end her eight-and-half years' long self-exile at a time when the deadline for holding presidential elections would be over on October 15. She does not want to be party pooper for Gen Musharraf who seems to be seeking his re-election at any cost.

Benazir Bhutto has also avoided to land in Lahore or Islamabad. This could be for two reasons: One, she perhaps does not want to bring her party in confrontation with the ruling PML in Punjab. This also reflects her falling confidence in her support base in Punjab, and its capital Lahore, where in April 1986 she was accorded historical welcome by tumultuous crowds on her return from first exile. She has played safe by choosing Karachi as her port of disembarkation where her party can easily mobilise party supporters from the interior Sindh to come to greet her.

The only issue could be the opposition from the MQM which is quite possessive about Karachi. It has not allowed anybody from the outside to demonstrate its show of strength, be it chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry who was sent packing from the airport or Imran Khan. The MQM has so far not opposed Ms Bhutto's arrival in Karachi and Ms Bhutto has also said that she might enter into an alliance with the MQM after the general elections. Given a close and steadfast association between the MQM and President Gen Pervez Musharraf, this is yet another indication that Ms Bhutto has a tacit and secret understanding with the regime contrary to her public posturing.

In politics, actions speak louder than words. A tacit agreement (save minor hitches) instead of a public deal helps Musharraf to prevent the ruling party from falling apart. At the same time it helps Benazir maintain her credentials in the eyes of her supporters. In fact, the unwritten deal is a fig leaf for both parties.

Insiders say the Musharraf-Benazir understanding is above petty squabbles between the PPP and the ruling PML. The brokers and guarantors of the deal are influential international actors, establishments in Washington and London, who hold in their hands the financial lifeline of the country. They have high stakes in this region where re-grouping of Islamic militants is perceived as a major threat to their interests. To fight the threat, the Musharraf regime has deployed nearly 100,000 troops on the western border, the largest deployment on this border in the country's history. Insiders say majority of these troops have been taken away from Kashmir region along the Line of Control with Indian-administered Kashmir. Islamabad has taken this massive step on the assurance provided by the US that they would see to it that Pakistan does not face any threat from India on the eastern border.

The Islamabad establishment considers threat from the western border grave and serious that requires long-term strategy. To meet this threat, Islamabad has taken steps to normalise relations with India. The objective is to reduce troops on the eastern borders and redeploy them along Afghanistan border and the tribal region. The other plank of the strategy is to strengthen the moderate political forces in the country with the military in the driving seat. The power-sharing or understanding between Musharraf and Benazir is a result of this policy. In the face of this overbearing consideration, petty political considerations have little relevance.

By joining hands with religious parties, Nawaz Sharif pulled out of this equation. Hence Saudi Arabia and Saad Hariri, the son of former Lebanese prime minister and American ally in the region Mr Rafique Hariri, came into action to save the applecart which Nawaz Sharif wanted to upset by landing in Islamabad on September 10. The regime sent messages to Sharif that he might come to Pakistan after a month or so when Musharraf gets re-elected but he remained defiant. Now again, there are reports that Sharif may be allowed to return home before the general elections. In a way, Sharif's presence at the time of general elections in the country is in the interest of civil-military establishment because he would keep Ms Benazir Bhutto in check. The split mandate and fractured assembly has been a perennial desire of the military rulers. It gives the establishment leverage to intervene in and steer politics.

Neither the return of Benazir nor that of Sharif poses a serious threat to the survival of Gen Musharraf. His nemesis is the apex court that has been assertive of its authority since the judicial crisis. In some crucial recent verdicts, the Supreme Court seems to have veered away from the doctrine of necessity it had been using to legitimise past military takeovers. There is a possibility that the Supreme Court's nine-member larger bench may hold Gen Musharraf ineligible for standing in the presidential election on the plea that he is a government employee being the military chief. Senior constitutional expert and the ruling party senator S M Zafar says in that eventuality Gen Musharraf may impose martial law. Others say the corps commanders' meeting will decide the future course of action.

In any case, the capital is abuzz with the speculation that a surgical or brief martial law may be imposed in the country to defy the apex court.

Another possibility is that the Supreme Court may allow Pervez Musharraf to contest presidential election but after leaving the position of chief of army staff as a one-time special case and to save the whole system from derailing. In this scenario, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz may ask the president to dissolve the assemblies and fresh general elections could be held in the next two to three months. President and COAS Pervez Musharraf would hold the elections by installing a caretaker government, with the approval of ruling PML and the PPP. Once new assemblies get into place, Pervez Musharraf may leave his position as army chief and the assemblies may re-elect him.

THE election

Hearing multiple petitions against the candidature of Musharraf as president, the Supreme Court has once again become the centre of attention

By Naveed Ahmad

"An ounce of facts is heavier than a ton of laws." A universal saying was quoted by veteran lawyer and counsel for Pakistan Lawyers Forum, A.K. Dogar while pleading before a Supreme Court larger bench hearing petitions against General Musharraf's dual office claim. The Supreme Court has once again become the centre of attention as political wrangling ends up in Court Room 1.

After the restoration of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Qazi Hussain Ahmad challenged Musharraf's claim to the dual offices of army chief and presidency, passage of his age of superannuation and candidature for another term in presidency. Earlier, he had moved the Supreme Court against General Pervez Musharraf's referendum but did not get the required relief. Imran Khan is a fellow petitioner.

The third petitioner is a professor of pathology -- Dr Anwar-ul-Haq -- a man reputed for his professionalism and uprightness with rare medical distinctions from the United States. As Musharraf raised the profile of his campaign for re-election as president, Dr Anwar wrote to the Election Commission for nomination papers as a presidential candidate. The 57-year-old medical professor has one simple logic: "Musharraf is a government servant, so am I. This country cannot have two laws! If the Government servant clause does not apply to him, it must not apply to me."

Going beyond making his point, Dr.Anwar plans to contest elections against the general, regardless of the consequences. Upon denial of papers by the Election Commission, Dr Anwar has challenged Musharraf's candidature and claim to the existing office in the apex court. The Pakistan Lawyers Forum is yet another key petitioner before the Supreme Court.

The chief justice formed a nine-member larger bench, chaired by Justice Rana Bhagwandas to hear the petitions. As the nation follows the proceedings with great hope and of course, some fears, the Supreme Court has already brought some important aspects to light.

For the first time, the presidential camp has clarified in writing about the expiry date of Musharraf's claim to presidency i.e. November 15, 2007. Interestingly enough, the presidential camp led by extra-constitutional management veteran Sharifuddin Pirzada has declined to reply to the petitions in writing. Legal experts believe that the government's bid aims at avoiding opening fresh Pandora's box of self-contradictory statements, a lesson learnt after the embarrassing reference against the chief justice.

The only written statement from the Army House camp remains a conditional promise to doff the uniform 'if' Musharraf is elected to the presidency.

Hamid Khan and A.K. Dogar have both pleaded that the 17th amendment is discriminatory and opposed to the spirit of the country's parliamentary system. The petitioners have termed that the 17th amendment and dual office act are arbitrary in nature and cannot be sustained for being person-specific.

Hamid also pointed out that there is no intelligible differentia about Musharraf's person and that he should not be allowed to hold dual offices. The senior counsel for Qazi Hussain Ahmad and Imran Khan also told the court that no provision in the constitution allows holding of two offices.

The heated debate about the role of Supreme Court for validating martial laws and politicians' weaknesses in strengthening the parliamentary institutions at the time of presidential re-election is a healthy sign. Once again, the bar and the bench are taking the lead in guiding the nation.

The nation may not be concerned about the academic debate taking place in the impressive hall of Court Room 1, but they are anxiously waiting to hear a verdict that shuts the door on military intervention to power corridors once and for all.

As the legal debate continues inside the court, developments on the Constitution Avenue are not very encouraging. After a Musharraf-specific amendment in the presidential candidature regulations, the Election Commission has hurriedly issued the election schedule without waiting for the Supreme Court verdict.

As per the Election Commission schedule, presidential elections will be held on October 6 while intending candidates for the election can submit nomination papers up to September 27. Scrutiny of the nomination papers will be held on September 29 while the candidates can withdraw their nominations on October 1 and the final list of the candidates will be announced the same day.

The Supreme Court Bar Association President, Munir A Malik has already declared the Election Commission as partisan and its schedule as mala fide. The SCBA has called upon the civil society and lawyers community to stage a protest outside the EC headquarters in Islamabad on September 29. The opposition politicians too plan to join the show while the entire facade of elections hinges upon the decision of the Supreme Court due this week.

Headed by a retired Supreme Court judge, the Election Commission is not only acting in a partisan manner by attempting to ease General Musharraf's march to presidency but also adding undue public pressure on the nine senior judges mandated to decide the multiple petition aimed at blocking coups in the times to come.

Once again, the Supreme Court's verdict may be anybody's guess but there is no dearth of optimists in post-July 20 Pakistan.

Email: navid.rana@gmail.com

RIPPLE EFFECT
One-sided and unnecessary

By Omar R. Quraishi

The move by the Election Commission of Pakistan to issue a notification which exempts President Pervez Musharraf from Article 63 of the Constitution is totally unnecessary and shows that the commission cannot be expected to act independently in the coming general and presidential election. Article 63 requires that any individual who has been working in the service of the government can only contest an election to public office after a gap of two years and the EC move effectively paves the way for the president to present himself as a candidate for re-election.

However, news that this would have or indeed had happened came first not from the Election Commission itself but from the federal parliamentary affairs minister. It was only once his comments were made in public that a senior official of the Election Commission came on a private television channel and confirmed the move.

A day later, the EC issued a press statement which quoted the chief election commissioner as saying that the amendment to the Election Commission's own rules for the president's election was not person-specific. This is being disingenuous because if the change isn't person-specific and intended to help a particular individual then why was it carried out in the first place? Surely, the EC did not plan to help any other candidate who wanted to take a shot at becoming the country's next president but found his desire to do so hampered by the fact that he was a government employee.

In any case, the state-run APP news agency on Sept 17 quoted a senior official of the EC as saying that the notification was issued keeping in mind Articles 189 and 190 of the Constitution, according to which all institutions of the government were to act in accordance with directives and rulings of the Supreme Court. The official said that both in 2002 and in 2005 the Supreme Court had given rulings and that the exemption granted to the president, as a result of the notification of the change in the rules governing his re-election, were in line with these rulings.

Clearly, the EC official, and by that one should presume the government, was trying to deflect any criticism of this clearly prejudicial and biased move on to the apex court. Perhaps in the eyes of some people this may seem poetic justice; however the situation seems quite changed with regard to 2002 or even 2005 as far as the independence of the superior courts is concerned.

In this regard, remarks by two Supreme Courts judges, which they made while hearing petitions challenging President Musharraf's holding of two offices, are instructive. One of them wondered whether an article of the Constitution could be amended or deleted by 'sub-legislation' while another said that the change was 'a drastic development' and 'very significant'.

Election rules as framed by the Election Commission can only be changed with prior approval of a higher authority. Article 222 of the Constitution gives this role to the 'Majlis-e-Shoora' or parliament which makes sense. However, the EC has said that it made the relevant change after approval from the presidency. If this is actually what happened then two questions arise.

The first is that what about Article 222 and its stipulation (specifically clause 'b') that 'the conduct of elections' are to be made by law provided for by parliament -- why has this been conveniently ignored. And the second relates to the Election Commission as an institution. Its head, the chief election commissioner, is appointed by the president so for the EC to make a rule that without any doubt (and there can really be no argument over this no matter what kind of semantic gymnastics is employed) favours the president strongly suggests that the EC is not acting in an independent fashion. Given this, is it fair and logical for the commission to seek the president's permission for making a rule change to an election process whose only beneficiary would be the incumbent president?

Surely, there is a clear conflict of interest in the Election Commission asking the president for approving any such change in rules governing the presidential election.

Since the EC has said that the change is not person-specific, would it be fair to assume that Prof Anwarul Haque, in the government's employment and also expressing a desire, like President Musharraf, to stand in the next presidential election would now be allowed to stand in the contest? The same professor was reportedly hounded by his employer for expressing this wish and according to one report had been transferred from his post and ordered to recant his desire to contest the election -- all as punishment for standing up and posing as a challenger. The professor's case makes one really wonder what the government is afraid of -- it's not as if he has the backing of some large political party to have a half decent chance in parliament, and even if he did the PML-Q still has the numbers (at least in the current parliament) to defeat any candidate who stands in opposition to its own.

Furthermore, to say that Musharraf will give up the post of army chief after being re-elected also doesn't really cut it. What if he doesn't give up the post of army chief in spite of being re-elected -- then what? The president cannot really expect to score any brownie points by this tactic -- which will probably be used to show to the rest of the world that he kept his word on leaving the post of army chief. Of course, the best and more honourable way would be to leave the post first and stand for re-election as a civilian candidate.

The writer is Op-ed Pages Editor of The News

Email: omarq@cyber.net.pk

|Home|Daily Jang|The News|Sales & Advt|Contact Us|