Why did political parties fail to end horse trading through 18th Amendment: AGP

ISLAMABAD: Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed Khan on Tuesday asked why signatories to the Charter of Democracy (CoD) in their vow to remove distortions in the Constitution failed to do away with the menace of horse trading in elections while adopting the 18th amendment.

“Why the two major political parties as well as the co-author of the CoD, who is also around, did nothing to do away with this while adopting the 18th constitutional amendment through which over 100 amendments were introduced in the green book,” the AGP said before a five-judge Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed.

The bench was hearing a presidential reference through which President Dr Arif Alvi has asked whether the condition of secret ballot under Article 226 of the Constitution applies to the Senate elections or not.

The AGP argued that the federal government was making efforts to plug the menace of horse trading and vote buying but the political opponents were resisting the same.

Says signatories to Charter of Democracy had promised to remove distortions in Constitution

“In less than a month, a market will be set up and horses will be sold,” the AGP remarked, referring to the Senate elections in March.

He said CoD was signed in 2006 between two former prime ministers. Benazir Bhutto, who had made a commitment that every endeavour would be made to ensure that votes should not be sold, was martyred in 2007 and the 18th amendment was passed in 2010. But instead of making efforts for realisation of the commitment, we are being told that the government is blowing hot and cold, he said.

The observation came when at the outset of the proceedings PPP Senator and former Senate chairman Mian Raza Rabbani drew the attention of the Supreme Court towards the recent decision of the federal cabinet to move the 26th constitution bill, which deals with the same issue, in the National Assembly.

The standing committee of the National Assembly took up the bill and tabled it in the House, he said, adding it seemed the government was pursuing two remedies to the same cause. The two institutions will come face to face if the Supreme Court comes to a conclusion different to that of the parliament, he added.

At this, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, a member of the bench, observed that the Supreme Court reserved the exclusive power to interpret the provisions of the Constitution.

The AGP however brushed aside the impression that the government was pursuing two different remedies, saying the bill was placed before the National Assembly in 2010 and both the speaker as well as the Senate chairman in their separate synopsis before the Supreme Court on the presidential reference had also addressed the query.

The chief justice however observed that it was up to the government if it intends to withdraw the reference otherwise the apex court would answer the question raised before it.

Mr Rabbani made it clear that he was not questioning the right of the Supreme Court to interpret the constitutional provisions but wanted to bring to the notice of the court that the government was blowing hot and cold at the same time.

The chief justice wondered whether Article 186 of the Constitution under which the president had moved the reference before the apex court had become redundant if they had also moved the bill in the parliament for amending the Constitution. He also wondered whether the constitutional amendment had been done by the parliament and whether the reference had become infructuous.

Justice Ahsan also wondered whether or not it was within the powers of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to ensure no horse trading takes place during the elections.

The AGP responded in affirmative and when asked again by Justice Ahsan why the ECP was not doing this, he said the commission was opposing it.

The AGP said except for mentioning the name of the voter at the back of the ballot, the entire process of the elections will remain the same in the Senate elections in case the elections were held through open ballot. He said the open ballot was for the sake of transparency.