ECP de-notifies Imran, declares NA-95 seat vacant

Electoral watchdog issues detailed judgment of disqualification verdict


Rizwan Shehzad   October 24, 2022
Former prime minister Imran Khan. SCREENGRAB

ISLAMABAD:

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) de-notified on Monday former premier and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman Imran Khan as Member National Assembly (MNA) soon after it issued the written judgment of his disqualification.

The PTI chief's NA-95 Mianwali-I seat was declared vacant under Article 63(1)(p) read with Section 137, 167 and 173 of the Elections Act 2017, after being disqualified in the Toshakhana (gift depository) reference.

A four-member bench of the ECP had three days ago declared Imran's National Assembly seat vacant as it unanimously decided that he had misled officials about the gifts he received from foreign dignitaries during his tenure as the prime minister.

The ECP's 36-page written ruling issued today maintained that the PTI chief had “intentionally and deliberately” violated the provisions contained in sections 137, 167 and 173 of the Elections Act, 2017 as he submitted a “false statement” and “incorrect declaration” to the ECP in the details of his assets and liabilities filed by him for the year 2020-21.

Read Imran meets religious scholars ahead of much-hyped long march

It added that the PTI chief had attracted disqualification under Article 63(1)(p) of the Constitution read with Sections 137 and 173 of the Elections Act, 2017.

“Consequently he ceases to be a member of the National Assembly of Pakistan and his seat has become vacant accordingly,” the ruling read.

The 36-page judgment observes several “deficiencies in the statement of assets and liabilities submitted” by the former premier. It goes on to note that Imran “has not given any explanation that the non-disclosure of aforementioned details is unintentional, accidental or bona fide mistake”.

“It is established that the respondent has not complied with the provision of Section 137 and 173 of the Elections Act 2017 and has made a false declaration and incorrect statement before the Commission,” it adds.

It further states that Imran “has deliberately concealed the material facts by not disclosing the details of gifts in statement of his assets and liabilities for the year 2018-19 nor has accounted for the sale proceed. He has also not provided details of the gift items as required under column number 3 of Form-B. He has also failed to annex the details of cash and bank account of the sale proceeds as required under column h(i) and (ii) of Form-B for which all the details of the gifted amount has to be mentioned”.

Read more PM condemns anti-army slogans at Asma Jahangir conference

“The amount allegedly received in his bank account does not commensurate with the assessed value of the gift items,” it notes, adding, “the respondent [Imran] has filed false statement and incorrect declaration in material particular for the financial year 2018-19”.

It also stated that Imran has “made evasive and ambiguous statement in his written reply that the gifts purchased by him during the financial year 2019-20 were further gifted by him or on his behalf to others. However, the relevant column j(i) of Form-B is marked as N/A and there is no explanation in the remarks of column 3”.

The written judgment carries the signatures of Chief Election Commissioner Sikandar Sultan Raja and the four members that had presided over the bench.

Imran’s lawyer also reached the ECP in Islamabad to collect a certified copy of the written decision.

Earlier today, during a hearing on the PTI’s petition challenging the ECP’s verdict at the Islamabad High Court (IHC), Justice Athar Minallah had maintained that Imran was only disqualified to the extent of the seat he was notified on. He furthered that there was no need to hasten the process of hearing the plea, and that the case would be heard once the verdict's certified copies were presented.

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