ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned the hearing of presidential reference seeking an opinion on open balloting for the upcoming Senate elections till Thursday.
A five-member SC larger bench headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi heard the reference.
During the course of proceedings, the chief justice asked whether the people voted for the party or its manifesto.
Attorney General for Pakistan Khalid Jawed Khan said mostly the people voted due to the charisma of a leader, but in principle they should vote to a party and its election manifesto.
Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan remarked that the vote was usually given to a party and not an individual candidate.
The AGP said the people of India had rejected Indra Gandhi when she violated the constitution. The people questioned parties about compliance of their election promises, he added.
Justice Ijaz said the publication of a party’s election manifesto was also a legal requirement.
The AGP said the constitution mentioned political parties, which were were regulated by law.
However, mentioning in the constitution did not mean that political parties were formed under the Constitution, he added.
Justice Bandial said that the election of National Assembly Speaker and Deputy Speaker was in mentioned the Rules of Procedure. Whether the election of Speaker was held under the rules instead of the Constitution, he added.
The attorney general said the Election Commission did not conduct the election of Speaker and Deputy Speaker.
He said it was stated that the election of Senate Chairman was not held through open balloting. After the court’s opinion, the election of Chairman Senate would be held through open balloting, he added. He said that the election of Senate Chairman was held under the Constitution. A voter in the Senate election did not enjoy absolute freedom.
Addressing the AGP, Justice Bandial said he was giving references of Indian court verdicts but no secret ballot clause like Article 226 was present in the Indian constitution.
The AGP said the Indian constitution separately elaborated whether an election should be secret or not. Article 226 not stated that all elections under the constitution would be conducted by the secret ballot vote, he added.
The chief justice asked whether the founders of the constitution were unaware of the Senate election.
The attorney general said the buying and selling of votes, which existed presently, was non-existent in those days. In 1973, they were unaware that the bags stuffed with money would change hands, he added.
Justice Ijaz said there would be no role of money in politics if democracy continued to flourish.
