and determine” the answer to the three questions set out in Section 3(a) to 3(c) of Ordinance regarding the time period prescribed in Section 7(1) of the Ordinance.
Accordingly, it follows, inevitably, that the statutory obligation to undertake the enquiry and to make determinations is that of the Commission”, the PTI reply said. The PTI contended that this obligation for instance, would remain and subsist even if assuming, arguendo, no political party or other persons had appeared before the Commission after the promulgation of the General Elections 2013 Inquiry Commission Ordinance 2015 and constitution of the same.
In such circumstances, the PTI contended that the Commission would perforce have to continue to perform and carry out its stated function as set forth in Section 3 of the Ordinance read with Section 7 thereof.
This also shows that the onus to prove any allegation cannot be placed entirely on any political party or person raising the same before the Commission”, the PTI submitted.
It further submitted that the Commission may take judicial notice of the fact that both the Election Commission of Pakistan and PML-N-the later in power through the Federal Governments in the Punjab and through coalition in Balochistan have the control and custody of all the relevant public records and documents which can only be summoned through the orders of the Commission. Similarly, the witnesses suggested by the PTI are not its witnesses to whom summons will have to be issued by the Commission to appear.
Similarly, PML-Q in its reply requested the Judicial Commission to summon DG ISI, DG MI as witnesses to record their statements regarding alleged rigging in 2013 general elections.
Filed through advocate Dr Khalid Ranjha, the PML-Q submitted a list of 12 persons as witnesses including DG ISI, DG MI, Registrar Lahore High Court, Registrar Supreme Court, Secretary Election Commission of Pakistan, former Secretary Election Commission of Pakistan, former Chief Election Commissioners including Justice (R) Fakhruddin G Ibrahim and Justice (R) Hamid Ali Mirza.
Meanwhile, Jamaat Islami (JI) while submitting its reply submitted before the Commission that the plan implemented was to win all constuencies with maximum votes by forgery, fraud, rigging in Karachi, Hyderabad and in Fata.
Filed through advocate Rashid A Rizvi, the Jamaat Islami contended that the plan in Karachi division and Hyderabad was implemented by the MQM with the help and collaboration of Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) staff.
It alleged that in Fata, it was implemented by the then governor Shaukatullah Khan with the help and collaboration of Election Commission and political staff.
The JI alleged that all the mechanism process, devices and all the government officials who participated in the election process were directly in control of MQM in Karachi division and Hyderabad and in Fata the then Governor being the head of administration Fata, governor implemented the plan through his machinery/officials serving in Fata.
Likewise, Mohajir Qaumi Movement (Afaq) in its reply alleged that MQM headed by Altaf Hussain living in London in collusion with law enforcing agencies as well as election staff made it impossible for its candidates including Chairman Afaq Ahmed even to launch election campaign.It contended that Mutahidda Qaumi Movement (MQM) implemented the plan of rigging with active help of the law enforcing agencies as well as the election staff.