Following the announcement by Arsalan Chaudhry, son of former Chief Justice (CJ) Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, that he would file a reference to have Imran Khan disqualified from membership of the National Assembly (NA) because of Imran not mentioning his alleged daughter in his nomination papers, two Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) parliamentarians on Wednesday asked the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to provide them with Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif’s nomination papers, saying that the PM is culpable in numerous cases including his alleged involvement in the Mehran Bank scandal (Asghar Khan case) and that he is a known defaulter and hence criminally liable. The obvious attempt to deflect attention away from Imran is unlikely to fool many people. Some will say that it was inevitable that the various political forces jostling for power in the country would eventually sink to the lowest common denominator. In fact the political taunts the parties regularly throw at each other have reached such a derisive and crude level that currently the PML-N and PPP look like mature, elder statesmen by comparison. The question of whether Imran Khan has a daughter and whether she was born out of wedlock is as unimportant to the political realities facing the country as the price of eggs in China. In fact given inflation, the latter may rank higher. Arsalan Chaudhry’s commendable filial loyalty aside, his smear campaign against Imran Khan touched the lower depths when he said he would refer the matter to the ECP as a violation of Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution, which define the requirements for membership in the National Assembly (NA) and lay down grounds for disqualification. The Articles in question require a candidate to be “sagacious, righteous and non-profligate, honest and ameen (righteous)” and that he or she “abstains from major sins”. The Articles are noteworthy for two reasons: first, these are some of the many time-bombs inserted into the Constitution by former military dictator General Ziaul Haq, and were specifically meant to allow him to pick and choose candidates and eliminate political rivals on spurious, subjective grounds. Second, it is grossly prejudicial since none of the definitions of the terms used can be assessed objectively. They are about as fair as a clause requiring a candidate to be good looking. There exist no objective definitions of the terms ‘sagacious’, ‘non-profligate’, or ‘righteous’, much as there exists no objective standard for beauty. They are all in the eye of the beholder. The caveat here is that Imran Khan brought this on himself with his relentless and unfounded accusations against all and sundry, from media groups to the former CJ. In another country he would have been sued for defamation so fast his head would still be spinning. Instead former CJ Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry’s son decided to turn the tables on Imran with an allegation based in fact, which the PTI chief and his party stalwarts are finding hard to answer. While the Articles themselves are absurd, the reference casts doubt on Imran’s self-touted honesty and his credibility with the conservative-minded community. What is sad is that the PTI felt the appropriate response to the allegation was to have party members file similar references against Nawaz Sharif under the same prejudicial Articles. It is as though the party has only just learnt that there exists such a thing as the Constitution and that there are institutions present to apply its rules. Information Minister Pervez Rasheed noted as much when he said that the government welcomed the PTI taking the legal path and asked for a commitment from the PTI to abide by the court’s decision in the matter if it comes to that. His request has so far fallen on deaf ears since Imran seems adamant on taking out his ‘Azadi (Freedom) Tsunami’ on August 14. As usual then, Imran has missed the wood for the trees since the question of his paternity is a personal matter; instead he should contest whether Articles 62 and 63 are consistent with constitutional principles. But in order to do so he would have to leave his pointless agitation behind, admit a mistake, and work through the courts and parliament. *