The honourable Chief Election Commissioner will hear a most provocative petition on July 28th. It was filed by PML-MNA Zafar Ali Shah who, in relation to “respondent” Najam Sethi, Editor of this paper, calls upon the CEC to: (a) determine the religious status of the Respondent (b) strike off his name from the voter list to a Muslim seat of any Assembly if he isn’t a Muslim as per the constitution (c) strike off his name from the electoral rolls to a non-Muslim seat as well because he has violated constitutional articles 62(h) and 63(1)(g).
Article 62(h) says that a person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) unless he has not, after the establishment of Pakistan, worked against the integrity of the country or opposed the Ideology of Pakistan. Article 63(1)(g) says that a person shall be disqualified from being elected or chosen as, and from being, a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) if he is propagating any opinion, or acting in any manner, prejudicial to the Ideology of Pakistan, or the sovereigty, integrity or security of Pakistan, or morality, or the maintenance of public order, or the integrity or independence of the judiciary of Pakistan, or which defames or brings into ridicule the Judiciary or the Armed Forces of Pakistan.
The “basis” of this petition is a “report” contrived from Pakistan’s High Commissioner to India in which various allegations were trumped-up against Mr Sethi in the context of a speech he made on April 30th in New Delhi.
When news of the petition was flashed some weeks ago, most lawyers and jurists opined that the CEC would swiftly quash it “in chambers”. After all, they reasoned, the High Commissioner’s “report”, which forms the “basis” of this petition, had already been trashed for several reasons. First, after three weeks of investigation, the ISI did not press charges of sedition against Mr Sethi under the army act either on the basis of this “report” or on any other findings. Second, Mr Sethi’s lawyers had so successfully junked the “report” in the Supreme Court of Pakistan that the government was compelled to drop the charges of sedition and set Mr Sethi free on June 2. Third, on June 8th, the special judge of the anti-terrorist court in Islamabad “discharged” Mr Sethi because the police cited “lack of evidence” in proceeding against him in relation to the sedition case brought by PML MNA Amanullah Niazi whose FIR was based on the same High Commissioner’s “report”.
But the High Commissioner’s phony “report” was not the only reason for believing that the CEC would swiftly dispose of the petition in chambers. How on earth, it was wondered, could anyone “prove” that anyone else was not a “Muslim” when he/she absolutely insisted that he/she was one and when he/she had never personally said or done anything which could be construed as repudiating or suggesting a religious faith other than that of a Muslim as defined in Islamic jurisprudence as well as the 1973 constitution.
In the event, however, the honourable CEC served notice on the Attorney-General to appear before him and acquaint him with his views on the matter. Subsequently, a notice was served on Mr Sethi warning him that if he did not attend the hearing of the case at 10 am on July 28, “the matter will be heard and decided” in his absence!
However motivated, and whatever the legal questions about jurisdiction, this petition raises potentially destabilising and dangerous questions which could rebound to everyone’s agony, seriously erode civil society and paint the country in the most primitive colours internationally: Can anyone go to the CEC and demand that anyone else’s religious status be determined to the detriment of his/her own defined status? Indeed, on the principle of primacy, why cannot any citizen of Pakistan petition the CEC to check out the religious status of the prime minister and all the MNAs and MPAs of Pakistan, including all those tens of millions of Pakistanis who were listed on the Muslim rolls before Mr Sethi was listed, as a prelude to determining Mr Sethi’s status as demanded by Mr Shah?
Further, in the absence of any expressly delineated or annotated definition of the “integrity” of Pakistan in the constitution, how can anyone determine any opinion “prejudicial” to it, especially since the fundamental right to free speech and thought is also enshrined in the constitution? Worse, if the yardstick of “morality”, or “independence of the judiciary”, or “security of Pakistan”, or anything “which defames or brings into ridicule the judiciary or the Armed Forces of Pakistan” is to be applied for qualification as a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora, then the CEC would most respectfully be advised to consider, suo moto if necessary, the disqualification of the PM and most members of the PML on each and every such count, individually and collectively, before taking up the case of a journalist who is not even a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora!
This is a potentially inflammatory and divisive matter. The CEC’s judgement will impact on the lives of all Muslims and all Pakistanis.