The Pakistani Spectator

In the judgment (dated 16^th January 2009) of Farah Hameed Dodar case, Justice Sardar Aslam of the Islamabad High Court has written that:

‘On 21-08-2008, answer scripts of Farah Dogar were submitted to the chairman, who ordered on 10-09-2008: “Please have the answer book of this candidate re-assessed.’

Erroneously judged or purposefully twisted. Let us go through the facts which were placed before the court by the Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (FBISE) Islamabad himself. The events before 10-09-2008 were as:

‘Farah Hameed Dogar had appeared in Intermediate (pre-medical) Part II examination 2008 under Role No; 545207. The result of the said exam was announced on 4^th August 2008. In the result Farah Dogar secured 640 marks out of 1100 and thus awarded ‘Grade C’. Farah Dogar, on 20^th August 2008 had tendered an application to the Board for re-checking of her four papers i.e. English II, Urdu II, Pakistan Studies and Physics II. On 29^th August she submitted another application to the Board requesting two more papers to re-check which were Chemistry II & Biology II.

Under the rules, all the papers were placed before the Re-Checking Committee. On re-checking it was found that there is a mistake of only one mark of Question no: 4 of Biology II Paper whereas there was found no mistake in the rest of the four papers. Approval of the competent authority was sought on 3^rd September 2008 for an increase on one mark in Biology II paper of Farah Dogar. In the meantime the office hands of the Board received orders of the Chairman, written on Farah’s original application of 20^th August 2008 that: ‘I would like to see her answer books myself also.’

On 21^st August, 2008 the Assistant Controller Examinations had sent the four answer sheets i.e. Biology II, Urdu II, Physics II and one more to the Chairman through his Controller Examinations.

On receiving claims of Farah Dogar and some other candidates complaining ‘wrong marking’ on their papers, the Chairman on 10^th September 2008 ordered in writing that ‘this candidate’s (Farah Dogar) answer sheets be re-assessed’.’

The decision totally omits the fact that a re-checking committee — as provided for under the rules — was formed, which gave only one additional mark because of the re-counting and unanimously concluded that except one mark in Biology all other five papers were checked and found correct (CFC). Dissatisfied with the addition of just one mark, the chairman later sought re-evaluation.

It becomes strange that, before the High Court, the Federal Board (FBISE) itself positioned along with applicant Farah Dogar before the IHC and appraised the court that the board has used its powers under the rules and Law and has awarded additional marks to the applicant as per available provisions. While submitting parawise comments in the said court the board maintained they have not committed any irregularity while awarding additional marks to the applicant and they have done so within their powers. It was also suggested to the court that under provisions of Rule 1.2(1), the chairman of the board cannot be questioned in an administrative or legal proceeding. Board has powers under section 4 of 1975’s Law to get action and implementation by all available means.

There is no mention of the fact anywhere that Farah Dogar was one of about 1000 candidates who had applied to the board for allowing re-checking. But without any application moved for re-assessment, only Farah’s case was taken up for re-evaluation despite a comprehensible and clearly understandable legal bar. There is no explanation or reason offered on the pages of file as to how Farah’s case was that of severe hardship and different from the rest of the candidates.

The question arises if the chairman has exercised this authority in any case other than that of the daughter of the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Sources in the FBISE confirm that Miss Farah’s was the only case where her answer sheets were re-assessed.

While doing so the Board’s Chairman ignored the fact that in all similar cases, the board or university concerned had always refused re-assessment on applications from candidates, who consequently approached the superior courts for orders to the board or university for revaluation of their answer sheets. In none of the cases quoted in the relevant decisions of various high courts, the board or university has ever been ordered to re-assess any candidate as has been uniquely done in the case of Farah Dogar.

Agha Tariq Mahmood Khan, an advocate to represent FBISE, with his reply assisted the court by telling that:

The experts in concerned subjects and the head examiners completed the whole process of re-assessment as per instructions of the chairman. The afterwards details of the papers cropped up as:

1. The head examiners of two papers, Pakistan Studies & Chemistry II, had declared that the marking on their answer sheets are as per ‘marking scheme’ and do not need change.

2. The head examiner of Biology II made up an increase of one (1) mark in Question 4 which were left over in counting by mistake.

3. The head examiner of English II paper changed his assessment from 58 marks to 67.

4. The head examiner of Urdu II paper changed his assessment from 62 marks to 67.

5. The head examiner of Physics II paper changed his assessment from 32 marks to 38.

Once the Chairman had also written on Farah’s file ‘perused the record.’ However, it is worth mentioning here that the chairman’s orders for re-assessment “in relaxation of rules;” were not valid which were probably made under immense pressure from the Chief Justice’s office. It is also on record that the applicant Farah Dogar had requested to recheck her six papers. Some how the other the board officers had gone through the process on four papers only (in fact the head examiners of Chemistry II and Pakistan Studies had refused to obey Chairman’s orders of this illegal re-assessment). Again when the Chairman was subjected to more pressure, he had to note the above mentioned words on the file that: ‘I would like to see her answer books myself also.’

In nut shell Farah Dogar got total addition of 21 marks in her score. 20 marks were awarded as a result of re-assessment whereas one mark was added up which was left over in counting by mistake. The chairman had accorded approval of this increase of 21 marks for her on 15^th September 2008. This addition in marks brought an improvement of Farah’s overall grade from ‘C’ to ‘B’.

The same day of 15^th September 2008, the Controller of Examination issued / prepared an amended Mark Sheet with amended figure of 661 marks & amended grade of ‘B’ and personally handed over to Chairman.

Submitting parawise comments on the petition of Muhammad Azam Sultanpuri, the Board (FBISE) did not reply paras 1 & 2. While replying para 3, the Board admitted that total 201 candidates / applicants of this examination, including Farah Hameed Dogar, have been given an increase in their marks and grades. It was not purposefully made clear that out of these 201 candidates how many were provided the facility of ‘re-assessment’ like Farah Dogar. The silence speaks that there was only ONE candidate named Farah Dogar who had been considered eligible for re-assessment. The rest of the 200 applicants were subjected to avail benefit of ‘re-checking’ only.

Coming back, while answering this paragraph the Board had also tried to justify by saying that:

In 2005, the Board received 740 applications for rechecking and 73 candidates were awarded more marks.

In 2006, the Board received 884 applications for rechecking and 132 candidates were awarded more marks.

In 2007, the Board received 1104 applications for rechecking and 136 candidates were awarded more marks.

In this regard the interview of the Controller of Examination, Muzaffar ul Hassan, taken and recorded by one M Ahmed Noorani of ‘Daily Jang’ dated 15^th January is worth consideration. It should be remembered that Mr Muzaffar is an old experienced officer, attached with the FBISE since its first day’s launching at Islamabad and Keeps an optimum reputation of honesty and straight forwardness. He first time, after Farah Dogar’s case in offing, opened his mouth when he realized that his ex-boss & ex-Chairman Air Commodore (R) Sharif Shamshad has spoken a blatant lie on oath before the IHC while giving his testimony in the judicial proceeding. He stated that ex-Chairman Shamshad has misled the court by asserting through his counsel Raja Abdul Rehman that:

‘…. There are two persons to check each answer sheet; first by an examiner and then by a head examiner. Under the Rule 7.6L(4) the head examiner has to check 10% of the marked papers to re-assess the marks awarded by the examiners. This is a routine exercise. In this way thousands of the papers on various subjects are re-checked and re-assessed which are available in the board’s record room. Farah Dogar’s papers were also re-assessed as per provisions given in Rule 7.6L(4).’

The Controller Examination Mr Muzaffar felt disturbed on this statement. He told the media that ex-chairman has told a lie in the court because Rule 7.6L(4) do not give permission for re-assessments by head examiners after announcement of results. Under this rule the re-checking and re-assessment by head examiners can only be made before announcement of the result. After announcement of result no officer has an authority to re-assess the papers. In the case of Farah, re-assessment was made after the result.

Mr Muzaffar also stated the fact that throughout his career of about 33 years in FBISE he has never seen such an event in the board. He has never taken part in such re-assessment exercise using this rule after announcement of result nor has he ever witnessed such glaring violation of this rule.

Mr Muzaffar also confirmed that in total 201 candidates were given an increase in their marks. Out of 201 applicants, 200 candidates were given benefit of a mistake in their totals (generally called re-checking) possibly overlooked by the first examiner. During this exercise Farah had also got one mark as addition, making 641 from originally secured 640 marks, due to mistake of totals in her Biology II paper. Only one applicant Farah Dogar got the benefit of getting her papers re-assessed under specific orders of the Chairman which was against the rules and strange for every one in the Board. She got then 661 marks.

It may be kept in mind that a Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, headed by an MNA of PML(N) had taken notice of this case of Farah Dogar which was taken up on a newspaper item brought forward by the News of Islamabad edition. One Ansar Abbasi had unearthed the scandal. The process of evaluating the correctness of the case was in the offing when suddenly the Chairman of the Standing Committee took serious turn announcing that the Committee intends to summon the CJP Justice Dogar to explain his conduct in the capacity of Farah’s father.
Naturally it was taken as a revenge from PML(N) on their years old stance that PCO judges should be removed and the judiciary of 2^nd November 2007 should be reinstated by the sitting PPP government. The sitting judiciary planned in a different way, therefore, on 5^th December 2008, the Supreme Court, while taking up a petition, had stayed a probe by the standing committee into the matter, but later dismissed the petition.

{It is a point to keep on record that the IHC chief had initially refused to stay the proceedings on-going then in the Parliamentary standing committee on education on Farah Dogar case. Tormented by the refusal, a stay was then managed from a single judge of the Supreme Court on 5^th December. It was all done by the sitting government to save Chief Justice Dogar from being dragged in the controversy.}

On 13th December, Farah Hameed Dogar personally came out in defence of her and said that saying her career had no grey area and her blotless performance in school and college could be verified.
This issue has agitated many minds. Federal Minister for Education Mir Hazar Khan Bijarani himself explained (on 19^th January 2009) while commenting on the IHC’s decision on Farah Dogar case that:

‘there is no rule or provision for reassessment / remarking of papers after announcement of examination results under any circumstances and, if allowed, it will open a Pandora’s box which will damage the country’s education system. No one is above the law but we will have to examine the record of Farah Dogar’s case whether during the process of assessment/marking of Farah’s papers, she was given some extraordinary favour.

There should be no doubt that if some irregularity is found in marking of the papers. We will take all possible measures against those who committed this act, but only after the record is returned to us. But it is again asserted that reassessment is not allowed under any law and under any circumstances whatsoever. He repeated that if allowed, reassessment would open a Pandora box’.

It is interesting to mention here that Bijarani, while talking to this scribe in his chamber in the National Assembly on 22^nd December 2008 said his ministry would take strict action on the reassessment issue once the case was disposed of. In press he was quoted as saying, ‘You don’t know what we will do in Farah Hameed Dogar’s case. The whole nation will see when we take action.’
We all are unlucky in a sense that here again our general populace has seen a play of rift between the Presidency and the office of PM MR GIlani. The president’s block of companions was bent upon to save CJ Dogar in this quagmire whereas the PM wanted to adopt a policy of non-interference. Though at last Farook Naik, the Federal Minister for Law and Lateef Khosa, the Attorney General of Pakistan made their way through on the basis of blatant lies and deliberate miss-interpretations before IHC but it brought worse name to their offices and in turn for the PPP in saddles. Despite a clear stand taken in both houses of the Parliament by the Education Minister Mr Bajarani, the Ministry of Law, under the able guidance of Farook Naik, forwarded the same twisted explanations and comments as prepared by the Chairman FBISE.
The representative of the Ministry of Law deliberately kept this cogent fact away from the knowledge of the court that the then Chairman had ordered to re-assess only one candidate’s papers (and that were of Farah) not the whole lot of 201 applicants. The Ministry of Law gave an intentional impression to the court that all the 201 applicants had got the facility of reassessment whereas the fact was that only one case was considered for re-assessment and the rest of 200 applicants got their marks increased through re-checking. This was the fact which was purposefully twisted before the court.
Lateef Khosa afterwards backed out saying that he was not involved in the game nor was he authorized to vet the comments submitted by Chairman FBISE.

The PM Gilani was not at all in favour of interfering in this dirty game neither in the Parliament nor outside. Contrarily the moment he came to know that his press secretary Mr Bashir had facilitated a private meeting between New’s Ansar Abbasi and the CJ Dogar (in December 2008), he immediately fired the officer and sent him home.

Now an interesting episode from the history of our beloved Pakistan:
PML-N Information Secretary Ahsan Iqbal termed the decision as ‘another black chapter in the judicial history’. He said the decision had strengthened PML-N stance on PCO judges that these judges lacked the courage to give decisions against the wishes of those in the power corridors. It was not surprising for them because they knew the PCO judges would decide the case in favour of Farah Dogar.
But just foe record sake here, I’ll like to invite attention of worthy Secretary PML(N) towards an historical event of General Zia era, when a politician close to him had requested him for the favour of admitting his daughter in Army Medical College Rawalpindi which had then sixty seats.
Zia sent her application to General Mirza Aslam Beg – then VCOAS with the remarks to accommodate her, who forwarded it to Major General Waheed Kakar the then Adjutant General (AG) for ‘necessary action’. Gen Kakar, however, returned the file with the remarks ‘Regret, she doesn’t come up to the merit.’
On his next routine visit to the GHQ, Gen. Zia ul Haq just walked unannounced into the office of the AG and confronted him with the application saying, ‘I am sure, there must be a way out to admit her’. Gen. Kakar, true to his reputation, stood his ground saying, ‘Sir, under the rules I cannot. However, if you order it, I will admit her’. General Zia, probably resigning to the inevitable, started moving slowly towards the door but before reaching it turned back and asked where she stood on the merit list. ‘Sir, she is 79^th and we have only 60 seats’, answered the AG.
With a flash rising to the occasion, Gen Ziaul Haq ordered, ‘Increase the intake to 80 from this year’ and walked out triumphantly.
In the words of Col (Rtd) Riaz Jafri: ‘Rules were not violated and yet the ego vindicated.’ Rules were flouted about one year later when an illegal migration of Maryam Nawaz Sharif from Army Medical College, Rawalpindi to the King Edward Medical College, Lahore was prearranged, managed, ordered and affected.

Trackback URL