Sins of the spouse: Two more challenges to Kulsoom’s candidacy dismissed

SC says Nawaz’s case was separate; no evidence provided to show Kulsoom committed crimes

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed two more petitions challenging the acceptance of Kulsoom Nawaz’s nomination papers for the NA-120 by-election, with Justice Qazi Faez Isa observing that it is a demand of democratic process that the mandate of the people is accepted. He also said that matters related to public mandate could not be adjudicated on assumptions.

A three-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Gulzar Ahmad, heard the petitions filed by Pakistan People’s Party candidate Faisal Mir and another candidate for the seat.



The bench noted that it is mandatory that evidence should be provided regarding the petitioners’ allegations of concealment of assets.

It also said that this case is different from the Panama Papers case, wherein Nawaz Sharif was found to have failed to disclose salary, adding that though the petitioners against Kulsoom raised three points, they have yet to prove them. Likewise, Justice Gulzar Ahmad said that there is no evidentiary basis to rule against the respondent for her husband’s actions.

Later, the bench also asked the petitioners to approach the election tribunal, which is the appropriate forum for adjudicating such matters after elections. Later, the petitioners decided to withdraw their petitions.



On Sunday, Kulsoom – the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) candidate for NA-120 – easily won her husband’s former seat, which was vacated after he was disqualified under the Supreme Court verdict in the Panama Papers case.

PPP's Faisal Mir, Pakistan Awami Tehreek's (PAT) Advocate Ishtiaq Ahmad Chaudhry, and Milli Muslim League's (MML) Nabeel Shahzad had filed the petitions invoking the writ jurisdiction of the LHC. They had challenged the decisions of the returning officer and an election tribunal whereby Kulsoom’s nomination papers were accepted.



The petitions claimed that Kulsoom had failed to submit full details of her tax returns and statements of assets and liabilities. The application said that she purposely concealed her assets and did not disclose a United Arab Emirates iqama (work permit) with her nomination papers, thus making her ineligible to contest the by-election under articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution.