We are obviously referring to the Wednesday's army given timetable of 5 to 6 months needed for making a voter list with photographs and national identity cards, and the Thursday's rejection of it by the Election Commission (EC), saying that the task requires 18 months minimum.

Let us go back a bit. The chief election commissioner (CEC) on April 5 said he would need 18 months to hold the election. He divided the time required into two parts -- six months for preparatory work and 12 months for field work -- so that the election could be held at the end of that period. Later, on several occasions, he even mentioned that the election might be held earlier if things move fast enough. In fact, we should congratulate him because he did move fast. On the 14th of this month after meeting the chief adviser, the CEC told the nation, through the press, that he was ready to start the field level work from August. Obviously this implies that all preparatory work will be completed by July, which means he will have done in four months what he had planned to do in six.

Adding to our speedy movement towards the election, the chief adviser, on every occasion he gets, reiterates his determination to hold the election as early as possible, the last being during his meeting with the Korean ambassador on Thursday.

On Wednesday, much to our delight, a group of army experts briefed the media on the EC premises itself that they had all the expertise and preparations for producing the all important voter list with photographs and the national ID cards within four to five months or at the latest, five to six months. Fantastic we thought. This fitted in very well with Army Chief Lt Gen Moeen U Ahmed's statement in the early days of emergency that the armed forces could prepare the voter roll in nine to ten months. If we take four months for the preparatory work (timeframe given by the CEC) and five to six months for the field work, then the army chief's statement perfectly tallies with what the army experts told the press. So far we can see a consistency in the events and statements as they unfolded.

Now comes the mystery or should we say mischief! On Thursday, within a day of the army experts' statement to the press, Secretary to the EC Mr Humayun Kabir, hurriedly, perfunctorily and surprisingly rejected the army's timeframe and repeated that there is no way that the task of preparing the voter list can be completed in less than 18 months time.

Here an incident at the army experts' press briefing needs to be recounted. As a part of briefing the press, the army also demonstrated how various forms were to be filled by asking the journalists themselves to fill them. At that stage, the electronic media cameramen, as there were many, were told that they would be given a chance later to film the demonstration, which however was hurriedly cancelled on a reported instruction from an EC commissioner.

Going back to the EC Secretary's rejection, we want to ask why? Especially, when the proposal had been demonstrated, more than once! Four months ago, on February 18 to be precise, army experts gave a special demonstration to the chief adviser, in presence of the CEC, on how and by when the army can prepare the voter list with photographs. In mid-March an army team visited the EC and gave a special demonstration of the method and system by which they can prepare it in the shortest possible time. More recently on May 10 they gave a special demonstration to the EC again with a more detailed work plan.

It may be mentioned that throughout the above process nothing was said to the press till the aforementioned briefing on May 15.

We have gone to some length in making our case that there appears to be an attempt to try and take more time than necessary in preparing the voter list. The army group has been working on the project from the very beginning, as can be understood by Gen Moeen's own announcement early on. Subsequent to that the army experts had more time to fine tune their proposal and methods.

Given their expertise, and not to forget their reputation, which will be greatly sullied if proven wrong, we are not willing to believe that they do not know what they are talking about. In fact if we consider that their coming into the scene in the first place, is based on their public promise to give the nation a truly acceptable election, then it is logical to assume that the army experts must have done their homework very thoroughly before going public with their voter list timetable. To us therefore, the army experts' timetable is far more credible than the out of hand rejection of it by the EC secretary.

Here we would like to bring to the focus of course that the EC's new leadership is honourable and highly respected. The CEC enjoys public confidence and his reputation for personal integrity remains a source of credibility and support for the process he leads. But can we say the same thing for the structure he heads or the functionaries at the various levels that comprises his staff? How can we forget the criminal waste of public funds that occurred under Justice Aziz and his commissioners. Could that have happened without the support of the bureaucrats who formed the team, at that time? How can we overlook the fact that the gap between six months and 18 months in preparing the voters list is not only one of time but also one of resources. The more time we can take, the more money we can spend for the purpose -- increasing the likelihood of waste and misuse. The CEC can overlook this aspect at his own peril.

We conclude by demanding that the confusion raised by the hurried rejection by the EC secretary of the army experts' proposal, needs a public disclosure giving us a detailed and credible explanation as to where the differences lie. Please remember, election is now the main focus of the nation. We want it the soonest. Because of that every action of the EC will not only have to be timely, credible and correct they will also have to be transparent. The rejection so far is not.