ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) observed on Tuesday that if election by show of hands is a democratic requirement for transparency, the process should start from census, which should have been taken in 2008 to update the demarcations according to the population size. The court said that mistake of one institution should not be made a justification for the mistake of another institution. Hearing Sindh government’s plea wherein it sought vacation of a Sindh High Court order and restoration of the third amendment to the Sindh Local Government Amended Act (SLGAA) 2015, a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali showed its displeasure with the governance system in the country. “Is it the responsibility of the executive or the judiciary to start an investigation into misappropriations?” the chief justice asked. “It is the job of the executive, but the judiciary is blamed for not taking suo moto notices and constituting commissions,” he said. Justice Jamali said that they were not blaming any individual or the party, but the entire system. However, he said, the system had to be run despite all its flaws. He said that one mistake could not be the justification for another mistake. During the hearing, Babar Awan, counsel for the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), which is in power in Sindh, argued that the SLGAA 2015 was in compliance with the constitution and not a single section was repugnant to the constitution. If the court sets aside the petition, he said, there would be a conflict of law because in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab the elections were held by show of hands. He said that amendments were made lawfully for transparent elections and that election by show of hands was a useful method. The court remarked if the mode of election was so useful then why it was not adopted for the election of the prime minister and the chief minister. The court suggested that the PPP and the Muttahida Qaumi Movement should develop a consensus on the mode of election to elect the Karachi mayor, deputy mayor, chairmen and vice chairmen. Due to unavailability of Advocate Farogh Naseem, the counsel for the MQM, the court adjourned the hearing till April 14.