Source: IHRC

Justice Siddiqui while quoting Senator Raja Zafarul Haq’s report on the matter has pinned
the blame on the former law minister Zahid Hamid and former Federal Minister for
lnformation Technology and Telecommunication, Anusha Rehman.
• Justice Siddiqui has also ordered for Haq’s report to be made public
• ln a first since the entire Khatm-e-Nabuwwat clause controversy in the Election Act, 2017
began, Justice Siddiqui has also declared that apparently a deliberate and motivated effort
was made to alter the clauses.
• “It is for the Parliament which can explain the real intent but primafacie it appears that a
deliberate and motivated effort was made by the draftsmen of the bill to bring Qadianis in
the loop of majority in order to diminish their separate identity as non-muslims, 11 Justice
Siddiqui stated in the order.
• Apart from quoting Haq’s report which holds Hamid and Anusha responsible for the changes,
the court has held all the lawmakers responsible for their failure to see the motive & lacuna
and simply passed the act in violation of the law.
• 111 observe with great concern that ali the members of the National Assembly as also the
Senators (without distinction of parties) failed to identify the motive, lacuna and an effort to
frustrate constitutional amendment through simple enactment which is not permissible
under the law,11 the written order reads.
• Haq’s report on the matter pinpoints the lawmakers – Hamid and Rehman, in the case, for
the controversy attached to the alterations to the Election Act 2017.
• ln the detailed judgment, Justice Siddiqui while quoting Haq’s report stated that a sub
committee in its 91st meeting held on 24 May 2017, considered draft Election Bill, as
redrafted by Rehman and Shafqat Mehmood, and it was decided that the forms may be
reviewed/ redrafted by Rehman for consideration in the next meeting.
• ln its 92nd meeting held on 31 May 2017, he stated, the committee considered redrafted
forms presented by Rehman that were approved subject to some rechecking/scrutiny by the
convenor (law minister).
• “Hamid was also member of the Parliamentary Committee on Electoral Reforms and
Convenor of its Sub Committee, during a meeting held on this issue, admitted to the fact
that basically it was his primary responsibility to see that the draft does not contain any thing
controversial but somehow he felt that he failed to perform his duty despite his legal
acumen; experience and command of language,” the order further adds.
• “ln my opinion, Justice Siddiqui said, “parliamentarians either exhibited casual approach or
failed to realize the sensitivity of the issue and, to this end, could not expose the plot against
the Constitution. lt is painful that despite pointation the majority of the parliamentarians
failed to give due deference and importance to this delicate issue which is evident from
proceedings of Senate’s 267th Session held on Friday, the 22nd September, 2017.”
• Considering that the matter requires a detailed scrutiny, he said, it is difficult for the court
to single out any person, party or group. However, he added, the Zafar-ul-Haq report is
relevant and “this Court directs to make it public.
• Since necessary amendments have already been brought in the law, therefore, the judgment
read, it may not be appropriate for the court to further dilate upon the matter except that

More: