Voter List --Nadra-- Missing Voter dilemma



  • Here a few of my colleauges have been discussing (its unfortunate that i couldn't locate the original thread) about IK's petition which is being heard by honourable SC regarding some 30 million fake votes (according to IK) in the voters list.

    For the memory of these honourable friends , i am quoting a judgement of SC

    http://www.hinduonnet.com/2007/08/11/stories/2007081156591600.htm

    This bench was headed by honourable CJ IMC. and following is the interesting part of the judgement.

    "

    At the last hearing, the court said it was unconstitutional to restrict registration of voters to only those who could produce national identity cards and asked the Commission to come up with a method to correct the lists.

    "

    NOw based upon above mentioned judgement , few points arise.

    a) NIC or CNIC is not a requirement

    b) A vote can't be called fake or bogus just because he is not in the NADRA database.

    Further to that , its also interesting to note that

    a) Till now , NADRA has issued on 85M CNIC.

    b) Total population of pakistan is around 180M.

    This is going to be a very fundamental case and it would be interesting to see how CJ IMC adjucates to that keeping in view his previous judgment (mentioned above).



  • Discussed previously but from a different angle:

    http://pkpolitics.com/discuss/topic/fake-votes-in-na-55-130000-height-of-corruption?view=all.

    Lets see what courts will do to solve this issue.



  • To begin with SC should consider that NADRA itself is responsible being the main culprit; an inept good for nothing organization that failed miserably since its inception and fell for perks/rewards from our corrupt politicians. Result is a missing voters list.

    Khalid Hassan has pointed this out since long in his article:

    When NADRA was established, the first thing that struck everybody was its name, the second example after NAB of the government having picked up a rather unfortunate set of acronyms. NAB has lived up to its name by nabbing those on the establishment’s hit list, rather than bringing to justice the fat cats who have been on the rampage in the Pakistani hencoop. As for NADRA, it is a name more appropriate to an abducted woman from the town of Pir Mahal in Faisalabad or a hoodlum in the back streets of the old city of Lahore than an agency assigned with the task of setting up a national database.

    I do not know who the head honcho is but like most head honchos under this government, it must be a gentleman in uniform or one who was in uniform until recently. Whoever he is, he should know that something is very seriously the matter with his empire. Several of its computers are absent without leave. For instance, if you go to the NADRA website and click the link ‘Apply Online for NICOP/POC,’ the message thrown back at you says: ‘Apply Online Section is down for maintenance. Please visit later.” “Please visit later” is like being told by a person who owes you money, “The cheque is in the mail.”

    Some years ago, it was announced that Pakistanis settled abroad, who had taken foreign citizenship, could apply for a Pakistan Origin Card by filling in a form and submitting it with $100 to the nearest Pakistani embassy, which would pass on the application to NADRA (not Lady Naipaul, I clarify), and a POC card — good for seven years — would follow. Great idea but is it working?

    The experience of one Pakistani lady, whom I will only identify as Ms BJS, is illustrative of what happens to some who apply for a Pakistan Origin Card (POC). The applicant is assured that all that is required of him or her to establish a claim is “at least one proof of Pakistani origin”, no more. The form itself requires only those applicants furnishing information about a “living Pakistani relative” who are claiming Pakistan origin “only on relationship basis”.

    Ms BJS, who was born inside Texali Gate, Lahore, and who has lived in the United States for the last 30 years, applied for a Pakistan Origin Card in December 2005. She fulfilled all requirements, including furnishing “at least one proof of Pakistani origin”, which she did in the form of a copy of her Pakistan passport. After several months, when she inquired when her POC would be issued, she was told informally — but not in writing — by the Pakistan embassy in Washington, where she had made the application, that her papers had been found “incomplete” by NADRA.

    After some running around, she found that the “Facilitation Cell, SRC Directorate (NICOP Dept), NADRA headquarters, Islamabad” had objected that Ms BJS had not provided her NIC (National Identity Card) number. There is no such requirement laid down in the application form, and in any case, Ms BJS could not have provided an NIC number for the simple reason that she had never had an NIC. So this is the sort of shoddy work that NADRA is doing. Ms BJS is a graduate of the Punjab University and she took her MA from the University of Dhaka, studying under such teachers as Andleeb Shadani and Hanif Fauq. Her brothers and other members of her family, including her children, are all settled in the United States. She was asked to “send a copy of NIC herself (if held) along with Number of copy of CNIC/NIC of Father/Mother/Blood Relative so that her case may processed (sic) on priority (sic).” There is absolutely no such requirement listed on the application form, so may one ask NADRA: What on earth’s goin’ on?

    My own inquires have shown that NADRA’s work, at least in its dealings with overseas Pakistanis, is poorly supervised. Mistakes in PIC or NICOP cards issued are rampant. Names are misspelt and dates got wrong. It is not uncommon to be issued a card, which shows American cities as being located in the United Kingdom and British cities as being located in the United States. The sort of objection which was placed on Ms BJS’s application is common. This is a crying shame and although I have no illusions that anything printed in the press changes anything in Pakistan, one writes about such things out of habit.

    I have serious objections to the POC form devised by NADRA’s geniuses on several grounds. First of course is the column on religion and the Zia ul Haq-ordained declaration about who is a Muslim and who is not, a matter which lies in Allah’s domain alone. Column 22 states, “In case of a State Subject of Jammu and Kashmir (please shade the applicable box) AJK, Migrant from Kashmir Valley, Migrant from Jammu and others.” This is horrendous. It has been Pakistan’s position from day one, both at the United Nations and everywhere else that the former State of Jammu and Kashmir is a single indivisible entity whose future remains to be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of that State and in accordance with UN resolutions. Why has NADRA divided the State of Jammu and Kashmir into three parts and, with that, its people, the Kashmiris? I, for example, am a State Subject, having been born in Srinagar, but belonging to Jammu, and I consider myself and am considered by the Government of Pakistan as a person originating from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, which the United Nation has declared to be a disputed territory. Does the breakdown of the people of Jammu and Kashmir in three different segments indicate a change of policy on the part of the present Government of Pakistan? An immediate clarification is essential and the present NOC and similar forms have to be withdrawn immediately and rewritten. Period.

    And, yes, another ridiculous question asked of the applicant is: “Has any of your parents/grandparents ever been a citizen/national of India or Israel?” Before 1947, everyone was a citizen of India, so what is this question meant to find out? Sixty years after independence, is this an attempt to differentiate between those who were or whose parents came to Pakistan as refugees? If Gen Pervez Musharraf was asked this question, he would turn out to have been an Indian citizen at birth and would probably be denied a POC, were he at some point to apply for one, not that he is going to.

    What I find shocking is that this form, with its politically dangerous and highly improper implications, was approved by the government. Question: Who approved it and on what basis? Meanwhile, Ms BJS’s Pakistan Origin Card should be issued immediately. For reference, her application No is 840E2343, dated December 7, 2005, Receipt No 000027344, forwarded by the Embassy of Pakistan, Washington.

    Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

    This entry was posted on Sunday, June 25th, 2006 at 3:03 pm.

    http://www.khalidhasan.net/2006/06/25/clueless-nadra-and-its-shenanigans/



  • Further to that , its also interesting to note that

    a) Till now , NADRA has issued on 85M CNIC.

    b) Total population of pakistan is around 180M.

    CNIC is issues for the citizen aged 18 and above. The total population of Pakistan, above 18, might be more than 85M but surely is not 180M.



  • salaudduin

    R all the 180 M registered in NADRA record?



  • My personal experience with NADRA

    Last month i was in khi and had to get police character certificate for one of my realtives.

    I went to Police station and produced orginial CNIC and passport but the gave me a list of docs which included

    E_SLIP by NADRA.

    I asked whats it. They said that go to NADRA and they will issue u this immediately.

    I went to NADRA Nazimabad office and they refused that we don't issue but our franchize issue it. (Interesting to note)

    Then i visited a franchize which had network and went to another and got a 2.5*5 inch slip.

    What this slip had.

    Name of person

    Father of Person

    Is this on NADRA database ? yes/no

    I think that speaks of NADRA's autenticity.

    NADRA was formed around 96/97 and its first major task was to computerize the data of all nationals based on census of 1998. I still remmber furnishing 2 forms in that census one of which was for NADRA.

    After 15 long years of that exercize , even now , NADRA can't claim that it has record of all citizens.



  • This issue of fake votes is being discussed by few respected members again but they haven't shared their oponion on this thread. wondering why ?



  • the fake votes were included by dictator mushi dog and with that list he gave zaani khan one seat in 2002 elections and with these fake votes he was thinking to form govt. of ppp, q-league and mqm.

    by next elections general pasha will no more be in office and we will see ppp will be wiped out and zaani khan will get only one seat from mainwali...

    hahahah to our pakistan tehreke internet kiddies



  • safshan

    i appreciate your point of view but lets stick to the topic.

    My point is pretty simple that these votes were never fake in the light of above mentioned SC verdict rather these votes were included in the list on the directions of SC. So , how come these votes being called fake ? isn't contempt of court ?





  • By: Terence J Sigamony | Published: April 01, 2011

    nation.com

    SC questions validity of past elections

    ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered correction of electoral rolls and disposed of a petition regarding 37.8 million bogus voters on the assurance of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) secretary that all bogus entries in the electoral rolls would be duly eliminated.

    A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and comprising Justice Mohammad Sair Ali and Justice Ghulam Rabbani was hearing the case of 37.8 million fake voters on the electoral rolls of various constituencies.

    The chief justice asked the ECP secretary on whose behalf bogus entries were made in the electoral rolls and on what basis the bye-elections are held in the presence of bogus votes.

    Secretary Ishtiak Ahmed Khan informed the court that the ECP has chalked out a plan to delete the names of all those fictitious persons who are not on the record of the National Database and Registration Authority (Nadra). He said that under the direction of the Chief Election Commissioner, the ECP has been making efforts for the past one year in collaboration with Nadra to prepare fresh, accurate, computerised electoral rolls on the basis of Nadra’s database pertaining to issuance of Computerized National Identity Cards (CNICs) to all citizens of Pakistan above the age of 18 years. He said earlier CNIC was not mandatory for the registration of voters.

    He said they have completed the first phase and Nadra has provided verified and augmented data pertaining to the 2007 electoral rolls that contains variances in terms of errors, multiple and bogus entries. Nadra has pointed out that out of total 81.2 million voters registered in 2007, only 44.02 could be verified, which means the remaining over 37 million were dubious.

    Justice Sair Ali remarked: “I cast my votes in several elections and today I am feeling that I was cheated by the ECP.”

    Ishtiak said in the second phase that would start from June, a door-to-door campaign would be launched for the registration of voters and in the third phase a verified list would be published.

    Afnan Kundi, counsel for Nadra, told the court it was responsibility of his the Authority to issue every Pakistani citizen, who is 18-year-old, a CNIC. He said that Nadra has registered 90 per cent Pakistanis and issued 81.59 million CNICs across the country including Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan. Justice Ghulam Rabbani said according to rule 17 of the Electoral Rolls Act, 1974, it was the duty of the ECP to update the rolls.

    According to result of verification of electoral rolls-2007 made by Nadra, as many as 15,028,808 voters were registered in electoral rolls-2007 without identity, 2,140,015 CNICs were invalid, 2,491,090 duplicate CNIC entries, 6,469,310 duplicate manual NIC entries, while 11,056,775 manual NIC did not exist in Nadra database.

    Ali Zafar, counsel for the petitioner Mubashir Luqman, argued that in the late Benazir Bhutto case, the Supreme Court has given direction to the ECP to remove the bogus votes. He said there should be harmony between the figures of Nadra and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

    The court after hearing the arguments disposed of the case.



  • whats this saladin ?

    Would u please bother to elaborate ?

    Were these votes not included by the order of honourable SC of Pakistan ?



  • Go through the videos u will get some information........



  • Sorry gentleman ,

    Your last msg and my last msg were posted at almost same time so please ignore my last msg plz.

    NOw coming to point, Honourable SC of Pakistan held in 2007 that NIC is not mandatory to be listed on the voter list and directed ECP of pakistan to include those votes into electoral rolls which had been excluded from rolls on the ground that those votes (approx 30 m ) at that time couldn't be verfiied through NADRA records.

    Now, considering that verdict (a verdict of SC is law of land) , the rolls of 2007 were perfectly valid.

    NOw , in 2011 , SC of pakistan ( a larger bench , i assume ) has over ruled that verdict so this will have effect from now onwards as till the new verdict, previous verdict of SC was law of land.

    Hope this explains the situation.



  • @sharif aadmi

    So are u agreeing that 45% were bogus votes?



  • saladin89

    NOt at all.

    Where did i say that ? I said that those votes were totally valid as per verdict of honourable SC of Pakistan.



  • What happened in Sahiwal yesterday? Again fake voters had a party and genuine voters spent their day blogging? Bloody internet.

    :)



  • @safshan

    u are really confusing me, i request other PTI supporters to make sense of all this. My brain is overloaded at this moment.



  • Take a chill pill bro, must be after shocks of yesterday's bye-election.

    :)



  • I never knew there were any bye-elections yesterday, need to look into it.

    Hope the jaali vote machinery wasn't in use!

    45% jaali last time round this time it will go to astronomical numbers....