MQM, by staging a protest rally outside Karachi Press Club, has expressed its serious concerns over the newly introduced Sindh Local Government Act 2013. Not only MQM, but also the people, by gathering in a large number, has endorsed it as well. Consequently, the newly introduced local government system has been very controversial.
The Sindh Local Government Amendment has so far turned out to be the most controversial in Sindh Assembly as almost all opposition parties seem to be annoyed over it. Ten (10) of the opposition parties including MQM, have already filed constitutional petitions in Sindh High Court against the Act. Now, the SHC, after hearing the arguments from all sides, has reserved its verdict. What will the SHC decide? Will it declare the discriminating Act null and void or let it go?
Going through the ordinance and the amendments to it, reveals that the opposition’s stand looks to be quite valid. Especially through the recent amendments by PPP-led Sindh government financial powers of the elected local bodies have been curtailed. Now, the Chairman and Vice Chairman have no powers to collect revenue and local taxes. This power has now been made provincial subject that is the violation of the Article 140-A of the Constitution.
The Furthermore, delimitation of electoral constituencies is the domain of election commission and as per the relevant laws it has to be done in relation to the last census statistics. In contrast to it, the powers to delimit constituencies have been granted to the district administration bureaucrats who traditionally obey the orders of provincial government. On top of it, the PPP, through the same amendments, has allowed a dubious population range gap in a way that a single UC can be delimited on a population range anywhere from 10 to 50 thousand which further increases gap between urban and rural sentiments. These are the reasons due which MQM considers the Sindh Local Government (Amendment) Act as contrary to the constitution.
The Furthermore, delimitation of electoral constituencies is the domain of election commission and as per the relevant laws it has to be done in relation to the last census statistics. In contrast to it, the powers to delimit constituencies have been granted to the district administration bureaucrats who traditionally obey the orders of provincial government. On top of it, the PPP, through the same amendments, has allowed a dubious population range gap in a way that a single UC can be delimited on a population range anywhere from 10 to 50 thousand which further increases gap between urban and rural sentiments. These are the reasons due which MQM considers the Sindh Local Government (Amendment) Act as contrary to the constitution.
We should not forget that in November 2012, when the Supreme Court ordered for delimitations, the Election Commission of Pakistan invited all the stake holders (political parties) in its office for consultation on the matter. MQM was of the view that the delimitations could not be carried out without the census. Moreover, if they were anyway to be done, they would have to be conducted throughout the country. Unfortunately, except MQM, all the political and religious parties disagreed to this and supported the SC`s judgment for delimitations. Finally, the Election Commission decided to go for the delimitations by arguing that since majority of the political parties (i.e.15 out of 16) had agreed to delimitations only in Karachi, the ECL would abide by it.
The ECP`s decision raised very serious questions on its intention. For example, why did the Election Commission consider only the number of parties to make its decision by completely ignoring the number of votes and the resulting seats of the different political parties? Traditionally, the EC has been giving importance to the number of votes and seats won by the political parties while making such important decisions. Then, why did it adopt a different rule in that case?
In other words, the ECP adopted an entirely a different and untraditional standard for the delimitations in Karachi. Not only this, even the Supreme Court expressed its satisfaction over such a step of the SECP. Now, the similar situation is prevailing once again. On one hand, the SLG Act (Amendment) is violating the Constitution and, on the other, majority of the “stake holders” are against the Act. Now, the issue is in the court. Let’s see if the court uses the previously adopted standard due to which the mandate of the Urban Sindh was disrespected.
No comments:
Post a Comment