DUBAI: As the Justice Nasirul Mulk Commission begins what may turn out to be a watershed probe for the country’s political dispensation, respected ex-CEC Fakhruddin G Ibrahim also has the last chance to come out and say it all so that he is exonerated of any failings in the conduct of the 2013 polls. Fakhru Bhai had resigned in the midst of his tenure but he has not yet paid back the debt of telling the Pakistani nation what happened in the ECP and who behaved in what manner and how he was relegated to just one of the many members of the commission, with no veto powers, thus making him almost irrelevant with a single vote among five. Yet he witnessed the entire show, run by nominees of political parties who never behaved like independent members of the commission and were almost remotely controlled by their political masters. As the Nasir Commission takes center-stage, with all political parties taking it extremely seriously, with the top legal brains rushing to present their cases and almost everyone trying to prove that elections were rigged by his opponent, the role of the ECP would soon emerge as the biggest common failure in all these accusations of rigging. So a detailed statement, and one that would be comparable to the dying confessions of any criminal, Fakhru Bhai, at his old age, can play his role for cleaning up the electoral confusion and let the nation know what really happened and how. We, however, wish that Fakhru Bhai may live the longest and the most satisfied life but by making such a disclosure now, when he can do it at a national forum, his remaining years will become much better and he may live even longer with the burden off his shoulders. Yet, if Fakhru Bhai decides not to come out with the facts, it would be a tragedy and one that he will have to live with a guilty conscience.It would also be interesting what other important members of the ECP have to say before the Nasir Commission. But if the commission found that the ECP, as an institution, failed in its duty to hold free, fair and transparent elections in most or a substantial number of the constituencies in the country, it would still be an indictment of the entire elections. This conclusion can only be possible if solid proofs are provided for each constituency by the petitioners and those who have decided to appear before the Nasir Commission.Collectively taken, this may become what the terms of reference of the commission describe as “systematic rigging.”
