KARACHI: The election tribunal on Thursday declared the election of a Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf candidate to a provincial assembly seat void for obtaining illegal assistance of a presiding officer in the constituency.

The runner-up, a Jamaat-i-Islami candidate, was declared to have won the PS-93 seat.

With the PTI set to stage a march on Islamabad on Aug 14 against what it has described as massive rigging in the last general elections, its candidate Syed Hafeezuddin who had defeated JI leader Abdur Razzaq with a margin of 4,472 votes became the third member of the provincial assembly whose election has been declared void by the election tribunal in Karachi.

The tribunal, headed by former judge of the Sindh High Court Dr Zafar Ahmed Khan Sherwani, had earlier declared void the election of PPP MPA Ghulam Qadir Chandio to PS-27 (Nawabshah), because he held a fake master’s degree. Earlier on July 26, it had proclaimed the election in PS-114, a provincial assembly seat won by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz candidate Irfanullah Marwat, void on account of corrupt practices committed by the winning candidate.

The election of the PTI candidate to the PS-93 was assailed through an election petition by JI candidate Abdur Razzaq who alleged that the returned candidate managed to obtain a different result of the count from their presiding officers on plain papers to his agents, showing a clear lead over the runner-up.

Syed Hafeezuddin had bagged 15,432 votes, while the runner-up had secured 10,960 votes.

Represented by Advocates Abid Zubairi and Umer Lakhani, the JI candidate in his petition alleged that the PTI candidate got the election results changed showing a lead of 4,472 votes over him and prayed to the tribunal to declare the election of Mr Hafeezuddin void.

The petitioner said the PTI candidate managed to obtain a different result of the count from the presiding officers through his polling agents at seven polling stations. He said that 463 votes were reduced by the returning officer at the time of consolidation of the result as compared to what had been shown by presiding officers in respect of polling stations (Nos. 29,32, 68, 71, and 77) and at the same time 5,538 votes of the returned candidate were increased in respect of the polling stations in question.

The counsel for the petitioner said that presiding officer at the polling station (No. 29) Safia Sultana Malik showed in her statement of count the votes polled by the returned candidate as 1,400. They said the illegal favour given by her was evident on record as the total votes cast at the corresponding polling station in respect of National Assembly constituency NA-241 were only 148.

They also contended that the other two presiding officers — Dr Jumman and Aftab Anwar — who also committed similar illegal practice were not traceable, which proved that they were fake persons and not authorised to conduct the poll but the returned candidate got them posted by hook and by crook which made the poll at these polling stations illegal.

The tribunal observed that the returned candidate committed an act of illegal practice within the ambit of Section 83(b) of the People’s Representation Act on account of obtaining her illegal assistance to further his election as a candidate.

It referred to Section 68(d) of the Act that reads: “The tribunal shall declare the election of the returned candidate void if it is satisfied that corrupt or illegal practice has been committed by the returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the connivance of the candidate or his election agent.”

The tribunal noted in the judgement: “In this case, the connivance between Ms Safia Malik, the presiding officer, and the returned candidate is also floating on the surface of the record as discussed in detail in the relevant issues and there cannot be any doubt that the act of mentioning 1,400 votes polled by the returned candidate illegally was nothing but to procure her assistance to further his election as candidate. Hence, he has committed an act of illegal practice within the contemplation of the section 83(b) of the Act.”

In view of the findings, the tribunal observed, the election of the returned candidate was liable to be declared void under Section 68 of the Act for the commission of an act of illegal practice within the contemplation of Section 83(b) of the Act.

It ruled that since the petitioner being the runner-up in the election has claimed to be declared the returned candidate, there appeared “no reason to deny such prayer as being the second highest in obtaining the votes of the electors of the constituency without any allegation from any side with reference to his qualification or disqualification, therefore, he is fit person to be declared the returned candidate within the contemplation of Section 69 of the Act”.

The tribunal concluded: “The upshot of the above discussion is that the petition is allowed as prayed with costs. The election of the returned candidate is declared as void u/s 68(d) of the Act and the Petitioner is declared as the returned candidate u/s 69 of the Act. The Election Commission of Pakistan may be informed accordingly to issue such notification in the official gazette.”

Published in Dawn, August 8th, 2014