ECP ruling on plea against Maryam today

Petitioner contended that appointment of Maryam as PML-N’s vice president is contrary to Constitution

ISLMABAD: The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) will announce its verdict on Tuesday on a petition filed by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf lawmakers against Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Vice President Maryam Nawaz.

A three-member ECP bench, headed by Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Justice (retd) Sardar Raza Khan reserved the verdcit after hearing arguments from the lawyers on Monday.
The decision would be announced after 11.00 am on Tuesday (today), the bench said.

The petition filed by Farrukh Habib, Maleeka Bukhari, Kanwal Shauzab and Javeria Zafar of the PTI in May, contended that the appointment of Maryam as PML-N’s vice president was contrary to the Constitution as she had been convicted by the accountability court.

Hassan Maan, lawyer for the PTI, argued that the Supreme Court had made it clear that no convict person could hold party office.
He told the court that the Maryam Nawaz was convicted over a National Accountability Bureau (NAB) reference, therefore, she could not hold any party office.

He added that the apex court noted that Section 203 of the Election Act -- which deals with the party offices -- should be read with Articles 62, 63, and 63A of the Constitution, which detail the qualification of the public representatives.

The lawyer recalled that a PTI candidate in South Punjab, Rai Hasan Nawaz, was dismissed from party designation on the same clause, which barred disqualified leaders from holding a position in the party.
Jahangir Jadoon, the lawyer for the PML-N, argued that Maryam has been appointed and not elected to the party post. He further pointed out that petitioners were not affected by the PML-N decision.

He also said that ECP had dismissed pleas if the applicants were not the affected parties.Barrister Zafarullah, the lawyer for Maryam, argued that a constitutional article cannot be read with a law.

He said that joining a party or holding a party office with a fundamental right of any citizen. He also said that it was not necessary for the ECP to take decisions on the basis of its previous decisions.

After hearing the arguments from all the sides, the bench reserved its verdict.