All hell broke when the news of the Government trying to amend through election bill especially where it states compulsory for the candidate to ‘swear’ by faith in finality of Prophet-hood and not following anyone who accepts someone else as the final prophet.
The social media debate basically circulated around this particular point, that not only creates ambiguity related to the underlying reason but also stirs the debate about the ulterior motive behind it. People are labeling it as a mutual conspiracy of Nawaz Sharif and Fazal ur Rehman, saying that they are trying to paint a picture that is contrary to the truth.
Here is the URDU translation
Khawaja Saad Rafique on his twitter account declared that no such changes have been made, and no compromise will be done especially concerning the points that concern the finality of Prophet-hood. He also attached the form with his tweet proving his point, and said that no one should fall prey to the entire propaganda.
انتخابی اصلاحات بل میں ختم نبوت کے اقرار نامے میں کوئی تبدیلی نہیں کی گئی, کسی قسم کے منفی پراپیگنڈہ کا شکار نہ ہوں pic.twitter.com/5ByfPrOQur
— Khawaja Saad Rafique 🇵🇰 (@KhSaad_Rafique) October 3, 2017
People reacted to it, especially saying that the minor change removes the word ‘swear’ from the statement, which gives it an entirely different connotation. With the presence of the word, it makes it compulsory to abide by it under any circumstances and violation will make the individual disqualified under article 62 and 63. However, without it, it only is synonymous to a declaration with no penalty encase of violation.
Just last week, Khawaja Asif said in America that they are more liberal than PTI.
This still remains a question that whether this minor amendment can lay foundation of paving the ousted Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s way back into politics.
خواجہ صاحب، قوم کو گمراہ نہ کریں، ختم نبوت کے حلف کی شق میں ترمیم کرتے ہوئے Swear کا لفظ حذف کر دیا گیا ہے pic.twitter.com/XfvJDKj6jb
— মুহাম্মদ উসমান (@usmi_sargodhian) October 3, 2017
The hidden reason behind this minor change is unknown and has not yet been explained, however can this lead up to softening the rigid articles of the constitution that relate to the eligibility of an individual to hold office?
What are you able to extract from this? Let us know in the comment section below.