Daily Times

The preeminent legal entities within the nation, namely the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) and the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), have openly articulated their skepticism regarding the competence of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikander Sultan Raja in orchestrating elections characterized by fairness and transparency, specifically those slated for February 8 of the upcoming year.

In an official statement released this Tuesday, the PBC’s Vice-Chairman, Haroon-ur-Rashid, and Chairman of the Executive Committee, Hassan Raza Pasha, not only reiterated the paramount importance of adhering to the scheduled general elections on February 8, 2024, but also underscored the critical necessity for creating an environment where all political entities and independent candidates are afforded a level playing field and equal opportunities. This, they argue, is imperative for ensuring the transparency and equity of the electoral process.

The legal bodies did not mince words when expressing their profound reservations about the CEC’s conduct in managing various aspects of the electoral proceedings, including election procedures, delimitations, and seat allocations. They specifically emphasized a discernible concern about the growing perception that, under the current leadership of the CEC, elections run the risk of being conducted without the desired levels of freedom and transparency.

The PBC further substantiated its stance by drawing attention to what it termed a “glaring example” in the allocation of two National Assembly seats to the CEC’s native district, Jhelum. The discrepancy arises as Jhelum, with an approximate population of 1,382,000, is granted two seats, while District Hafizabad, with a population of around 320,000, receives only one seat. A similar asymmetry is noted in the allocation of seats for District Rawalpindi, where an additional seat has been assigned despite its lower population compared to Gujranwala Division, prompting legitimate questions about the procedural transparency of the electoral process.

In essence, the legal bodies are not merely expressing skepticism about the CEC’s capabilities but are also providing concrete examples and detailed critiques of the perceived imbalances in the current electoral procedures, calling into question the very foundation of the transparency and fairness of the impending elections.