IHC issues notices to ECP, disgruntled PTI member

Imran’s counsel argues that the top poll body does not have the authority to proceed in contempt cases

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday issued notices to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and a disgruntled member of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on a petition filed by the party’s chairman that the top poll body had no power to proceed in a contempt case against him.

Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb issued notices to the respondents after Babar Awan, the counsel for PTI Chairman Imran Khan, argued that the ECP had no power to initiate contempt proceedings and that an order issued by the ECP on August 10 and all other contempt-related proceedings should be declared as void, unlawful and without lawful authority.



He had listed the ECP and Akbar Babar, the disgruntled member of PTI who had raised questions about the sources of foreign funds received by the PTI, as respondents in the case.

Imran’s counsel has argued that the Contempt of Court Act 1976, had been replaced by the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003, and that contempt proceedings are carried out under the ordinance in Pakistan.



Previously, Awan said, the ECP had the power to prosecute contempt complaints under Section 103-A of the Representation of Peoples Act 1976, wherein it clearly stated that rules under contempt of court are applicable.

Recently, the counsel maintained, amendments had been proposed by the National Assembly in the Election Bill 2017, which gave the ECP powers to prosecute contempt under Section 10 of the draft bill.

“If the election commission already had such powers then why section 10 was inserted in the new election bill,” Awan asked.

He added that it was abundantly clear that the ECP had “no powers prior to this proposed amendment.”

Awan argued that ECP has no power to initiate proceedings under Article 204 (Contempt of Court) of the Constitution, adding that no party can be left ‘remedy-less’ and “it is the worst case of abuse of process of law and the impugned order is whimsical, mala fide on law and facts as well as based on abundant bias”.

In the petition, the counsel said that Babar had filed a petition with the ECP against the PTI chairman and that the party had submitted a written reply before the top poll body.



Later, he said, ECP initiated proceedings against Imran after the commission found that a review petition by the PTI chief allegedly indicated “blatant disregard of the Constitutional institutions against which filthy and totally false remarks have been passed qua the Commission.”

Subsequently, Imran through his counsel, had objected to the proceedings on grounds that the ECP has no power to take up the case.

After hearing the petition, the ECP had dismissed it on August 10 which led to the PTI chief filing a petition before the IHC.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 31^st, 2017.