Who’s Sadiq and Ameen?

Published April 5, 2013

It was supposed to be a process of scrutiny of every election hopeful who’s submitted his/her nomination papers to the Election Commission of Pakistan.

What it seems to have deteriorated into, however, is a witch-hunt comprising Returning Officers out to humiliate politicians on questions of religion, personal life and even their appearance.

The main justification being provided for these interrogations are article 62 and article 62 of the Constitution – articles which did not exist in the original 1973 Constitution and were inserted by the military dictator Ziaul Haq.

Article 62, for one, explains the criterion of “qualifications for member of Majlis-i-Shoora (parliament)” and its clause (e) reads: “He has adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and practices obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstains from major sins.”The clauses also call for candidates to be ‘Sadiq’ and ‘Ameen’ (honest and righteous) – names given to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Many argue, however, that one’s faith and knowledge of religion cannot be gauged by questions asked by elections staff, who in turn may themselves not be qualified according to the very standards they have set. Members of civil society have also strongly spoken out against the scrutiny techniques.

In addition, election officials have also taken the opportunity to embarrass female candidates – one candidate, Tayyaba Sohail Cheema, was asked to show her face to everyone because she “seemed so much younger” than her actual age. Another candidate’s husband was told how his family life will be ruined because of his wife’s involvement in politics.

Now, candidates are being rejected left, right and centre as a result. Ayaz Amir, the PML-N candidate for NA-60 and a renowned journalist, was rejected based purely on an opinion expressed in a news column which was alleged to be against the ‘ideology of Pakistan’.

Others too have been rejected, such as Faisal Saleh Hayat on allegations of water theft – but many are questioning how this can be done without proof.

Many, however, are glad to see people they see as ‘looters of the country’ facing their come uppance, so to speak.

What view do you agree with? Do aspiring contestants deserve this kind of ‘merciless scrutiny’? Or have the officials gone too far?

Moreover, even if a rigorous scrutiny process is in order, is the criterion rational? Is it right for the Returning Officers to judge who is Sadiq and Ameen?

 

 

Opinion

Editorial

Parliament’s place
Updated 17 Sep, 2024

Parliament’s place

Efforts to restore parliament’s sanctity must rise above all political differences and legislative activities must be open to scrutiny and debate.
Afghan policy flux
17 Sep, 2024

Afghan policy flux

AS the nation confronts a major militancy problem in the midst of poor ties with Kabul, there is a dire need to...
HIV/AIDS outbreak
17 Sep, 2024

HIV/AIDS outbreak

MULTIPLE factors — the government’s inability to put its people first, a rickety health infrastructure, and...
Political drama
Updated 16 Sep, 2024

Political drama

Govt must revisit its plans to bring constitutional amendments and ensure any proposed changes to judiciary are subjected to thorough debate.
Complete impunity
16 Sep, 2024

Complete impunity

ZERO per cent. That is the conviction rate in crimes against women and children in Sindh, according to data shared...
Melting glaciers
16 Sep, 2024

Melting glaciers

ACCELERATED glacial melt in the Indus river basin, as highlighted recently by the National Disaster Management...