ISLAMABAD: Political woes of Sardar Ayaz Sadiq mainly the consistent attacks he has been subjected to, which started in May 2013 when he defeated Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan in the general elections, are unending.
Otherwise a suave politician, he has never encountered such a bumpy path in his entire political career. His remaining tenure as the speaker will be as turbulent chiefly at the hands of Imran Khan and his comrades as it had been since assumption of this office.
He deliberately vacated the speaker’s chair during the PTI chairman’s rare speech in the National Assembly and brought in someone else to preside the sitting. He did so to avoid any provocation to Imran Khan or a direct confrontation with him.
The speaker is a big anathema to Imran Khan--so much so that the PTI chairman has now pronounced that he no longer considers him speaker. This doesn’t make any legal difference to his position because he was not elected by the votes of the PTI, which has been opposed to him from day one. Way back in 2013, the PTI had fielded Shahryar Afridi, who had bagged just 31 votes against him.
Ayaz Sadiq is the only member of the present National Assembly, who was ousted by the election tribunal on a petition filed by the PTI, but had retained the seat in the by-poll held after sometime. Subsequently, he was re-elected as the speaker. His re-election as MP in which he had routed PTI’s Abdul Aleem Khan has again been challenged in a superior court.
Imran Khan’s antipathy to him in particular and that of the PTI in general apart, Ayaz Sadiq is widely respected by all the parliamentary parties because of his amicable nature and smooth handling of the parliamentary proceedings.
The speaker’s rejection of the references sponsored by the PTI and others against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his close family members on account of the offshore companies and acceptance of similar pleas against Imran Khan and Jehangir Tareen has caused the latest fury to the PTI chief.
As a matter of fact, Ayaz Sadiq forwarded to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) all these eight references. In six of them, he held the view that no question about the disqualification of the defendants has arisen while in the rest of the two he opined that such a question exists.
Now, it is up to the ECP whether or not to agree with the opinion of the speaker. It can even launch proceedings on the references in which he stated that no question of disqualification has arisen. The actual decision is to be taken by the ECP and the speaker has just transmitted the petitions to it.
The aggrieved PTI has the legal option to dispute the speaker’s ruling in a superior court, which has the authority to reject straightaway his opinion. So, Ayaz Sadiq is not the final authority.
Even if the ECP holds that a defendant merits disqualification on the basis of the evidence and documentary proof produced before it, its decision can be appealed against in a superior court. Thus, the ultimate arbiter is the Supreme Court and not the speaker or the ECP.
The PTI wanted the speaker to send all the eight references to the ECP without paying
attention to their merits and by ignoring the facts and substance of every petition. It desired that Ayaz Sadiq should have left it to the ECP to decide this question. However, under the Constitution, it is mandatory for him to conclude whether a disqualification question has arisen or not. The PTI wished that he should have skipped this responsibility. The hue and cry being raised by the PTI over his determination is obviously part of its politics to keep denouncing Ayaz Sadiq, painting him as his master’s voice.