JC’s questions on rigging probe

ISLAMABAD: All the twenty-one political parties are in a tight spot to come out with appropriate answers to the three specific and elaborate questions put by the judicial commission, which is looking into the charges of deliberate systematic manipulation in the 2013 general elections.
They are required to file their reply to the questionnaire before the three-member commission, headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk, holds its fifth public hearing on Tuesday. If it completes its proceedings as per the timeframe, 45 days, fixed in the presidential ordinance, it will conclude its proceedings by the last day of the next month.
While the political parties are working hard to find fresh evidence and proofs to support their allegations regarding poll rigging, they are unlikely to get anything new. They are mostly relying on what they have already submitted to the commission, which, however has not been satisfied with what it has so far received from them.
The questionnaire asked whether the 2013 elections were carried out in an honest and impartial manner; whether the polls were manipulated in a systematic manner and the identity of those who prepared any design or plan to rig the elections; whether manipulation took place in national constituencies only or provincial areas as well. The commission asked the parties to provide the material and the names of witness to back their claims.
After the formulation of the questionnaire, the political parties have to respond to it while remaining within its bounds. After that, the proceedings will enter a decisive phase.What the judicial forum has so far received are general statements, claiming that the hanky-panky took place in the previous polls, from all the political parties that have become active part of the proceedings.
As the proceedings have gone ahead, the judges have urged the political parties to produce evidence. It appears that all parties are solely relying on what they have presented to the commission. What the parties have filed with the commission, the forum has found it just an elaboration of their submissions already made.
In an attempt to present the allegation of poll rigging as plausible and convincing, some contestants have depended more on the number of political parties, which have approached the commission complaining manipulation, than the reliable evidence they have presented to the forum.
Although there are 21 political parties, which have jumped into dispute before the commission, the primary responsibility to establish that there was massive organised rigging rests with the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) on whose insistence the commission was formed.
The forum has a specific scope of inquiry. It will inquire into and determine whether or not the elections were organised and conducted impartially, honestly, fairly, justly and in accordance with law; whether or not the polls were manipulated or influenced pursuant to a systematic effort by design by anyone; and whether or not their results on an overall basis are a true and fair reflection of the mandate given by the electorate. The forum will answer these questions in its report.
The political parties, which have alleged rigging, taste the striking difference between hurling accusations publicly, without being challenged, asserting that their claims were gospel truth, and proving them before the commission with evidence.