ISLAMABAD  - The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) seems to be caught in a quagmire over its controversial decision to change votes of two Senate candidates after the announcement of election schedule.
The ECP after announcing election schedule for Senate earlier this month went on to change votes of two key Senate contenders of Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N), Iqbal Zaffar Jhagra and Raheela Magsi.
The change of votes at the eleventh hour by the ECP came to surface after Pakistan People's Party's (PPP) nominee for Senate election from Islamabad Nargis Faiz Malik challenged the transfer of votes of PML-N's Jhagra from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Magsi's vote from Sindh to Islamabad in violation of rules 20 of Electoral Rolls Act, 1974, that bars vote change once election schedule is announced.
Talking to The Nation on Monday, Nargis candidly said that Returning Officer federal capital Sher Afgan came up with a written verdict before hearing her petition which she alleged was a special favour on PML-N candidates and a blatant violation of election rules.
"It is a usual practice that a judge first disposes of petition through a verbal verdict and then the written statement is issued few days later. But in my case, the RO appeared with already written verdict and asked me to read it," Nargis said adding that the officer congratulated Jhagra and Magsi before hearing the case.
Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) also raised eye brows over the transfer of votes of two PML-N candidates from their respective constituencies to Islamabad terming it a pre-poll rigging.
But the ECP in a detailed statement as reaction to the allegation argued that the preamble of the Electoral Rolls Act, 1974 does not mention about its extension to the Senate elections. Section 20 of the Act does not allow any change in the electoral roll (voters' list) of a constituency after the issuance of election schedule therein to fill a vacancy is reproduced for ready reference.
Referring to the transfer of votes of PML-N's candidates to Islamabad, the ECP said that a province or the "Federal Capital" cannot be called a constituency as defined in the Representation of the People Act, 1976 and therefore, the provisions of Section 20 IBID, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be applicable to Senate elections.  
The ECP further pointed out that section 11(5) of the Senate Election Act, 1975 says that every proposal shall be accompanied by a certified copy of the relevant extract from the electoral rolls in which the name of the person nominated is enrolled.
"Section 13 (3) (d) (iii) of above Act says that Returning Officer shall not enquire into the correctness or the validity of any entry in the electoral rolls," the ECP said in a statement issued here.
It added that the Senate Election Act 1975 does not provide for any restriction of the type contained in section 20 of the Electoral Rolls Act, 1974 and, therefore, there is no provision that bars a prospective candidate to seek registration or transfer of his vote from one electoral area to another across the country before or after issuance of election schedule for Senate.
The ECP recalled that even in Senate elections held in 2009 and 2012, applications seeking registration/transfer of vote after issuance of election schedule for Senate elections were entertained by the Election Commission in view of the aforesaid legal position and the instant decisions were taken in the light of such precedents.