KARACHI: The Election Tribunal Karachi on Monday threw out two election petitions filed by defeated Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz candidates Liaquat Ali Jatoi and his son Karim Ali Jatoi against the election of rival candidates of the Pakistan Peoples Party to as many seats of the National Assembly.
PPP candidates Rafiq Ahmed Jamali and Imran Zafar Leghari had won NA-232 and NA-233 in Dadu by securing 76,876 votes and 110,292 votes, respectively.
Former chief minister Liaquat Jatoi had bagged 64,899 votes and his son secured 56,838 votes.
The petitioner father and son, represented by Advocate Parkash Jhamath, alleged that they were not provided a level playing field in the election during their electioneering as the returned candidates were in government and got posted police officers of their own choice in Johi and Dadu.
They said that the officials helped the rival candidates throughout their electioneering and created terror for petitioners’ workers and voters and refused to register cases on complaints but arrested their workers at the instance of the returned candidates.
Petitioner Karim Jatoi said that sub-divisional education officer (SDEO) of Johi was a close relative of MNA Jamali and he was instrumental in the posting of the polling staff favourable to the returned candidate.
He further alleged that two different chiefs of the Chandio tribe brought proclaimed offenders with the head money who worked in favour of the returned candidate and intimidated and threatened the petitioner’s voters by use of deadly weapons and removed his posters and banners from the constituency.
The defeated PML-N candidate said that his two workers were killed by the rival candidate’s goons and an FIR was also lodged in this regard.
He alleged that the returning officer had delivered ballot paper books of NA-232 and PS-74 and PS-75 to the returned candidate and the candidates for the provincial assembly which were used in their favour.
He alleged that the RO in collusion with the SDEO intentionally appointed untrained and menial staff leaving senior and trained officials as the polling staff.
The junior Jatoi said that the armed associates of the returned candidate removed forcibly his polling agents from the polling station particularly polling station Nos 200, 209, 304, 309, 220, 221, 223, 225 and 230.
The petitioner alleged that the presiding officers of the polling stations did not provide equal opportunity to all the voters to cast their votes but the voters of the returned candidate were accommodated to cast their votes till the late hours and stopped the polling at those 23 polling stations where majority of petitioner’s voters were to vote and where the polling had started at 2.30pm but did not give extra time.
He said that due to the absence of the armed forces and Rangers the returned candidate and his agents committed bogus voting at 51 polling stations mentioned in the petition in the absence of his agents who had been removed and injured.
The petitioner said that at the time of counting by the presiding officers at different polling stations mentioned in the petition his votes were excluded from the count.
They asked the tribunal that the election of the returned candidates may be declared as void as the same was procured by illegal and corrupt practices.
The PPP MNAs, represented by Advocate Zamir Ghummro, contested the petition and filed their written statement denying all allegations.
They prayed the court to dismiss the election petitions against their election.
The PPP MNAs’ counsel contended that the burden of proof of these issues was on the petitioners but they miserably failed to produce any tangible evidence to prove the allegations.
He further contended that whatever evidence produced by the petitioners was just hearsay, which should be discarded by the tribunal.
The tribunal, headed by former high court judge Dr Zafar Ahmed Khan Sherwani, ruled that the petitioner had failed to prove allegations through the evidence “as required under the Qanoon-i-Shahadat Order, 1984, which has been made applicable for the trial of an election petition through Section 62 (2) of the Act”.
The tribunal observed that “it can held without any doubt that the petition is liable to be dismissed with costs as the petitioner has miserably failed to prove his allegations”.
Published in Dawn, November 25th , 2014
