Khawaja Asif disqualified for life over nondisclosure of foreign income and employment Asif earned monthly salary of 50,000 dirhams ($14,000) while serving as foreign minister of Pakistan ISLAMABAD: Khawaja Mohammed Asif, the country’s foreign minister, was disqualified from holding a parliamentary seat by a three-member bench of Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday, putting the veteran politician’s career in jeopardy. The ruling was announced after Asif failed to declare his employment, work visa and monthly salary with a UAE company; his nondisclosure of a foreign bank account and incorrectly stating his occupation while filing his nomination papers with the Election Commission of Pakistan for the 2013 general elections. Asif was not available for comment immediately but rejected the charge that he had concealed anything and pledged to challenge the court ruling in a quick statement to a local television network. “We declare that … (Khawaja Mohammed Asif) was not qualified to contest the General Election of 2013 from NA-110 as he did not fulfill the conditions described under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution, read with section 99(1)(f) of the Act of 1976,” stated the 35-page order sheet, a copy of which was obtained by Arab News. The petition seeking Asif’s disqualification was filed by opposition leader Usman Dar of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, who campaigned against and lost to Asif in the last general elections. Dar pleaded in his petition to the court that Asif had hidden his income from the UAE and covertly renewed his iqama (UAE work visa) while serving as Pakistan’s foreign minister. Sharafat Ali, former Law Ministry adviser and legal expert, told Arab News the “disqualification is for life” under Article 62(1)(f). “No one can meet this criteria mentioned in this constitutional provision, and the concept of democracy gets defaced. The article is impractical under the given circumstances. It is created for ideal conditions that are only found in a utopian environment,” Ali said. Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and PTI leader Jahangir Tareen were both disqualified under the same article by the country’s top court last year. The legal expert said that the article was amended many times, mainly during military rules. “If you read the Article (62’s) sub section D and E, that would render everyone disqualified under Islamic injunctions,” he explained, adding the same legal and constitutional criteria should also be applied to the judiciary and the armed forces of Pakistan. The judgment, however, stated that the matter should have first been taken to Parliament. “It would have been appropriate if the political party (PTI) to which the petitioner belongs had raised the issue at hand in the Parliament before invoking the jurisdiction of this court,” it said. The judges noted their discomfort with the decision to disqualify an elected representative of people. It was a tough verdict against “a seasoned and accomplished politician” but more so “because the dreams and aspirations of 34,125 registered voters have suffered a setback,” the judgment concluded. Maryam Nawaz, Sharif’s heir-apparent, has called the decision “a fixed match,” a term used in cricket when the game’s outcome is preset by certain stakeholders. The verdict is another blow to the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), amid signs that it is undergoing an internal crisis. Qamar Cheema, a political analyst, told Arab News that PML-N “has a strong base in Punjab and will emerge as either a strong opposition or will maintain a thin majority which will let it to be relevant after the 2018 general elections.” He also maintained that the disqualifications would strengthen the PML-N narrative on the sanctity of the vote. “Instead of people questioning the PML-N over its five-year performance, it’s now PML-N that’s asking the people why its leaders have been forced out,” he said. Cheema added that the party had entered into an aggressive campaigning mode to win the hearts and minds of the people, showcasing its “political martyrs” who were elected by the masses but removed without public consent.