Sindhi Press Dec 14, 16 - 2007

Sindhi Press

Elections raise eyebrows
-------------------------
POLLS are a major mechanism for free expression of opinion. Through them people elect their rulers for a specific period, with the hope that these representatives will take care of their needs and requirements, and also change their living conditions. These expectations are not far-fetched.

Given the changes taking place worldwide in all spheres of life, new problems and new challenges crop up and need to be addressed. If these problems are not resolved in a timely manner, they become complicated and are then beyond the capacity of the people’s representatives to resolve. Here people need institutions and good rulers to redress their problems. People feel helpless if the entire election process, which is about choosing rulers, is not transparent.

Except one, all elections held in Pakistan have not been seen as being free and fair. It is strange that no steps were taken to address the objections raised against the conduct of earlier polls.

Once again polls are being held in Pakistan. Political parties are questioning the fairness of the elections. But the government has not taken any step to remove these apprehensions and doubts.

The caretaker government has claimed on different occasions that elections will be free and fair. If the government is not party to the election, it should consider the demands of major political parties and redress their grievances. — (Dec 14)
Subh

Revoking emergency
------------------
THE democratic process that had been obstructed when the emergency was imposed has now been revived with the restoration of fundamental rights and the Constitution — albeit with a few amendments. It is also being said that all the steps taken, which include the proclamation of emergency and the suspension of the Constitution, have been given constitutional cover that does not need the approval of parliament.

All said and done, these amendments are to come under consideration of the parliament which will come to be after the Jan 8 elections. The fact of the matter is that the changes have been introduced by an individual and the Constitution does not allow an individual to suspend basic law and then restore it in an amended form at his discretion. It was said that the emergency was imposed for the continuity of the democratic process. How can this logic be accepted when the basic law that guarantees rights and democratic governance is suspended? Later it was said that the emergency was imposed to fight terrorism. But the country witnessed an increase in incidents of terrorism and suicide bombings.

We are not asking why statements were changed regarding the need for emergency rule. Was the aim of the emergency to get rid of the judges and impose controls on the media? — (Dec 16) Kawish

— Selected and translated by Sohail Sangi.