Opp Senators reject open balloting bill in NA

ISLAMABAD: The government and opposition in the Senate Thursday were sharply divided on the proposed constitutional amendment moved in the National Assembly, envisaging open ballot for the Senate elections.

The members on both sides of the aisle appeared in no mood to move from their stated position for evolving consensus on the proposed piece of legislation, moved in the National Assembly, just ahead of the Senate elections. Though they shared commonality that horse-trading in Senate poll must be eliminated, the lawmakers had strong disagreement on how to go about it. Therefore, both the sides gave arguments for and against the proposed legislation. The treasury benches advised the opposition to support its efforts to end horse-trading, whereas the opposition members alleged that the bill was meant to serve the political interests of the ruling party, which they claimed, was losing control over its own legislators ahead of the Senate elections.

In the Senate, where joint opposition commands majority (but it is poised for becoming minority after the elections), the bill is unlikely to be moved soon, unless adopted in the Lower House, and for this a two-third majority is needed to support it, which the government does not have in the assembly. Both chambers of the Parliament were prorogued sine die Thursday.

Former Chairman Senate and PPP stalwart Mian Raza Rabbani raised the issue in the House, saying it was unfortunate that a vilification campaign was being run against the Senate. He had his concerns over the tabling of the bill in the National Assembly without taking the Senate into confidence, whereas the recommendations of the Committee of the Whole in this context had also been overlooked.

Rabbani alleged that while the National Assembly had already been made redundant and now attempts were being made to erode the little bit of efficacy the Senate, which still retained. And he referred to the way, the bill had been moved ‘without taking the opposition on board’ and left it there, being property of the other House. He contended was the bill moved in accordance with the Constitution and the Rules of Business.

He again cited the Constitution and relevant rules to argue that an adviser could not move a motion of thanks in the House or sign it, being the prerogative of a federal or state minister or a member.

Leader of the House Dr Shahzad Waseem rose to respond to him and explained that the government wanted to bring transparency and put an end to the tradition of converting the assemblies, which form the electoral college for the Senate polls, into merchandise and fixing of rates of members.

Shahzad Waseem decried the process of bidding for lawmakers like horses and the assertions in defence of it that it was beauty of democracy, saying, “This is a stigma of shame and disgrace on the Parliament.”

The leader of the House sought the opposition’s cooperation to doing away with the practice through legislation. To substantiate his point, he referred to the no-trust motion moved against Chairman Senate Sadiq Sanjrani by as many as 64 members of the House, 14 of whom, had ditched their respective parties in the secret vote and the chairman had survived the motion. Then he recalled how Prime Minister Imran Khan had expelled as many as 20 members of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly for horse-trading in Senate polls in 2018.

He deplored what he called the nexus between politics and corruption and insisted that this vicious cycle of land grabbing, money laundering and holding fake currency accounts using political clout had to be broken. With that spirit, he said the government had moved the bill in the assembly and its intentions were clear.

The PPP Parliamentary Leader in the Senate Sherry Rehman strongly opposed the government’s attempts to pave the way for open balloting in the Senate elections and contended that transparency in elections was of vital importance and there were no two ways about it.

However, she emphasised that respecting the ballot and changing the secrecy enshrined in the Constitution were two different matters, which required clarity, consensus and openness. She questioned the decision just before an election and said the government was not confident of its own members.

“Any sudden and unilateral change in the system would further complicate the electoral system of single transferable vote, so why take it to court on the one hand and on the other bring a bill without the requisite numbers for a constitutional amendment,” she wondered.

Treasury senators Faisal Javed of PTI and MQM's Muhammad Ali Saif also spoke and backed the government move and criticised the opposition for speaking against it.