PTI Chairman and deposed premier Imran Khan on Monday submitted his written reply with the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) in a contempt case, challenging the jurisdiction of the electoral watchdog, saying the notice issued to him was against the Constitution.
However, terming the reply unsatisfactory, the election supervisor issued a show-cause notice to the PTI chief and summoned him in personal capacity on September 27.
The reply submitted through Barrister Gohar and Faisal Chaudhry Advocate maintained that the PTI chairman had not insulted the election commission.
Last month, the ECP had issued notices to the PTI chief and party leaders Fawad Chaudhry and Asad Umar for levelling allegations against the commission and Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikander Sultan Raja.
The ECP spokesperson in a statement had maintained that notice had been issued to the PTI chairman for using “insulting and unparliamentary language” against the electoral body in various speeches.
The commission said the notices were issued after reviewing speeches of the PTI leaders which was provided by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) on the electoral body’s request.
The former premier has time and again accused the ECP and it chief of being biased and demanded of the CEC to step down. He had also accused the CEC of siding with the ruling PML-N against the PTI.
Read ECP postpones by-polls in 13 constituencies
On Monday, the PTI chairman challenged the authority and notice of the ECP.
The written reply noted that Imran in his statements had expressed his concerns over the role of the election supervisor, saying the electoral body did not have the authority to hear the contempt cases.
It said the notices issued were “not in accordance with the law”.
“The notice under reply is vague, cursory and without jurisdiction. It is unclear that the notices under reply are issued under what law and the gist of which also fails to explain specially the violation of any provision of law for which the notices have been issued?”
The reply said that the ECP secretary “under the law has no authority to act as commission and issue notices”.
“It is further submitted that neither the Election Commission nor the Secretary thereof can exercise suo moto powers, as the suo moto powers under the law and constitution as lies only with the apex court and no executive or quasi-judicial authority is legally empowered to exercise the referred powers.”
The PTI chairman, in his reply, said that the legality and veracity of the ECP notices had been impugned through writ petitions before the Lahore High Court (LHC) and the Sindh High Court.
Read more IHC puts off resignations of 11 PTI MNAs
The LHC had been requested to constitute a larger bench to determine among other questions whether the ECP could initiate contempt proceedings under section 10 of the Election Act 2017 and if it was a court or authority. The case is fixed for a hearing on September 15.
Referring to Article 19 of the Constitution, the reply stated that Imran had not insulted the ECP.
“That impugned notice is rendered oppressive, hence illegal being arbitrary and capricious under facts and circumstance of the case.”
The PTI chairman urged the ECP to quash the notices.
Terming the reply unsatisfactory, the election supervisor issued a show-cause notice to the PTI chief and summoned him in a personal capacity on September 27.
The ECP also termed Fawad and Umra’s reply unsatisfactory and asked them to appear before it on September 27.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ