PESHAWAR: A senator of Pakistan People’s Party, Adnan Khan, is about to complete his six-year term in the Senate on a stay order from Peshawar High Court.

The court had in Feb 2009 granted interim relief to him and suspended an order of the returning officer concerned whereby he was disqualified from contesting the Senate polls.

Mr Adnan, who is son-in-law of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Pervez Khattak, was only 34 when he contested the 2009 Senate elections on a seat reserved for technocrats on the basis of the said stay order.

Since the interim relief was granted to him, no noteworthy progress took place in a writ petition filed by him against the order of the returning officer. On most of the occasions the petitioner’s counsel applied for adjournment.

The case is now fixed for hearing on Feb 3 and it has almost become anfractuous as he will retire from Senate on March 21 and the Election Commission of Pakistan has already issued schedule of elections for filling the Senate seats which would turn vacant.

Pervez Khattak, who was provincial minister in the coalition government of ANP and PPP in the province in 2009, was the proposer of Mr Adnan. Mr Khattak got elected as MPA from PF-13 Nowshera on the ticket of Pakistan People’s Party-Sherpao (now named Qaumi Watan Party) but became minister while his party was in the opposition.

At the time of polls, Mr Adnan was a new entrant in PPP and was least heard of before. Even awarding him ticket for Senate polls had raised many eyebrows in the party.

The nomination papers of Mr Adnan for the seat reserved for technocrats from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were rejected by the returning officer, who was the joint election commissioner of the province, on Feb 14, 2009. The officer had observed that Mr Khan did not qualify the definition of a technocrat as he did not possess the experience of 20 years in relevant field as required under Section 2(d) of Conduct of General Elections Order, 2002, for a candidate contesting for the seat of a technocrat.

Court granted interim relief to Adnan in 2009 after he was disqualified by returning officer

Section 2(d) of the Conduct of General Elections Order, 2002 states that ‘technocrat’ means a person, who is the holder of a degree requiring conclusion of at least 16 years of education recognised by the University Grants Commission or a recognised statutory body: as well as at least twenty years of experience, including a record of achievement at the national or international level.

The appellate tribunal comprising Justice Jehanzeb Raheem of the high court had also dismissed his appeal and maintained the decision of the returning officer on Feb 19, 2009. The tribunal had ruled that Mr Adnan was hardly 34 and had got his masters degree from Preston University in 2001.

The tribunal observed that Mr Adnan had mentioned himself as a marketing consultant and keeping in view his 20 years experience he had started the said consultancy at the age of 14 when he had not passed even middle studies.

Mr Adnan assailed the orders of the returning officer and the appellate authority before the high court in the instant writ petition and also filed an application seeking suspension of the said orders. A bench of the high court on Feb 25, 2009, granted him interim relief and that relief has still been in the field.

The court had allowed him to contest polls and directed the Election Commission of Pakistan to make arrangements for his notification as candidate.

Against the stay order of the high CM’s son-in-law remains senator for six years on stay order court, one of the contesting candidates, Ali Gohar, had filed an appeal but it was dismissed by a three-member bench headed by the then controversial Chief Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar.

In his writ petition he claimed that the returning officer had not provided him opportunity of hearing. He has also challenged the definition of technocrat as provided in the Conduct if General Elections Order, 2002, contending that when the said Order was promulgated the Constitution of 1973 was held in abeyance and in 2009 it was not applicable to Senate polls.

After filing of the writ petition, former attorney general Malik Qayyum had represented the petitioner in the stay application. Later on, Malik Qayum was replaced by another former attorney general Makhdum Ali Khan as petitioner’s counsel. In around 31 hearings of the case the petitioner’s counsel did not turn up in over 20.

On some of the occasions the high court expressed displeasure over the non-appearance of petitioner’s counsel and observed that no further adjournments would be allowed. However, despite that the petition continued to linger on.

After the polls, a candidate Ali Gohar had also filed an election petition before the election tribunal on the same ground. However, the tribunal had adjourned hearing of the election petition for indefinite period observing that it would be heard after the high court decides the petition.

Published in Dawn January 26th , 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play