0
KARACHI, Feb 4: A full bench of the Sindh High Court on Monday dismissed a writ petition moved by the former federal minister, Ghulam Akbar Lasi, PPP candidate for the seats of national and provincial assemblies from Lasbela, against his disqualification under the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance and the election laws.
Mr Lasi submitted through Advocate Aslam Chishti that he was never arraigned in an accountability court and did not enter a plea bargain to attract the disqualification provision.
The NAB prosecutor-general, Dr Danishwar Malik, and the deputy prosecutors-general for Sindh and Balochistan, Advocates Siddiq Mirza, and Aurangzeb Khan, appeared in response to a court notice and produced the NAB record.
According to the record, Ehtesab Bureau chairman Saifur Rehman Khan had charged Mr Lasi, former PPP federal labour minister, with awarding a contract for construction of a labour colony at Hub (Lasbela) to his brother, Abdus Sattar Lasi, despite his higher bid. The loss caused to the exchequer amounted to over Rs11.4 million. Mr Lasi, who was behind bars in 1998 in another case, paid the amount and earned freedom from prosecution and was later released.
Appearing for the former Balochistan chief minister, Jam Mir Yousuf, who is contesting elections from the two Lasbela constituencies, Advocate Mohammad Riaz Ahmed submitted that Mr Lasi had also assailed his disqualification in 2002 and went up to the Supreme Court for relief. The Supreme Court held in 2003 that he had earned reprieve by a plea bargain and was disqualified from holding any public office for ten years. The 10-year-period was not yet over and the SC judgment held the field.
The bench, which consisted of Justices Munib Ahmed Khan, Mahmood Alam Rizvi and Farrukh Zia G. Shaikh, dismissed the petition against the decision of the Balochistan election tribunal.
Ghotki seat
By another order, the bench allowed Ahmad Yar Khan to contest from the provincial constituency PS-5 (Ghotki-I) provisionally. If he wins the poll, he will not be notified until an election tribunal’s decision regarding the authenticity of his academic degrees.
The candidate submitted his B.A. degree before the returning officer. There was no objection to the degree and his nomination was accepted.
The rival candidate, however, questioned the authenticity of the degree before an election tribunal and it was found bogus. The candidate, however, submitted madressah certificates equivalent to graduation and post-graduation. The rival candidate challenged the authenticity and equivalence of the certificates.
The bench ruled that the question of equivalence of madressah certificates was pending adjudication before the Supreme Court. The authenticity of the certificates was a factual controversy, which could not be probed, particularly because of the proximity of polls. The issue could be settled by an election tribunal and the candidate would contest the poll subject to the tribunal’s decision.
