ECP adjourns hearings against Nawaz’s re-election as PML-N head for indefinite period

The hearing was adjourned since the matter of the Election Act of 2017 already rests with the SC


Our Correspondent November 30, 2017
The hearing was adjourned since the matter of the Election Act of 2017 already rests with the SC. PHOTO: FILE

ISLAMABAD: The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Thursday adjourned all the hearings against the re-election of Nawaz Sharif as the head of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), for an indefinite period.

Nawaz Sharif re-elected PML-N president

The Election Act of 2017, paved the way for Nawaz to become head of the PML-N after his disqualification in Panama Papers case ruling on July 28. Rejecting his re-election as the party head, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and Pakistani Awami Tehreek (AML) had filed four applications at the ECP.

A three-member ECP bench, headed by the Chief Election Commissioner Justice (retd) Sardar Muhammad Raza, heard their requests today.

In the ECP, no one appeared on behalf of the PTI today while Advocate Niaz Inqilabi presented his and the AML’s petitions.

Speaking on this occasion, Justice Raza said, “Since the matter of the Election Act of 2017 rests with the Supreme Court, what we can do about it.”

“If a person is disqualified by the court, a political party cannot be registered on his name,” Advocate Niaz Inqilabi argued and added, “no political party can be registered in the name of a leader.”

PTI, MQM file plea against Nawaz’s re-election

However, the chief election commissioner continued that the PML-N was registered in the name of Pakistan Muslim League while Nawaz and Quaid-e-Azam are just groups.

Since the apex court is hearing petitions filed by varying political parties including the PTI, Awami Muslim League (AML) and PPP, the ECP later adjourned the further proceedings over the filed applications for an indefinite period.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

E-Publications

Most Read