SC asks Vawda’s lawyer to answer two court queries

Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial said on Thursday the Supreme Court would rule on the decision of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on the appeal of former PTI lawmakers and not facts of the case.

The chief justice also observed that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had disqualified Vawda in light of the facts before it and that the election supervisor’s decision was upheld by the IHC.

Heading a three-judge bench, Chief Justice Bandial told Vawda’s lawyer Wasim Sajjad to answer two court questions: whether the Supreme Court could uphold the IHC ruling under Article 62(1)f and why not the court use its powers under Article 187 of the Constitution in light of the facts.

According to Article 187, the Supreme Court has the power to issue directions, orders or decrees for doing complete justice in any case or matter pending before it, including an order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person or the discovery or production of any document.

Lawyer Wasim Sajjad said that it was pointed out in the court during the previous hearing that an expired passport was submitted to the returning officer but in fact a wrong copy was submitted to the court by mistake.

Read PTI distances itself from Vawda's presser, issues show cause

Sitting on the bench, Justice Ayesha Malik said that the expired passport was submitted to the returning officer. Sajjad replied that the returning officer had returned the documents after seeing the records.

Also sitting on the bench, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said that it was strange that the returning officer took the record but returned it after seeing it. He asked the lawyer wasn’t he running into difficulties while trying to prove his case.

Justice Malik wondered as to how the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) signed the identity card and documents of Vawda but did not put a date on them.

Justice Ali Shah said that giving up the dual citizenship was a condition for contesting the elections in Pakistan and not just cancelling the passport.

The chief justice said that the ECP ordered disqualification in light of the facts, which was upheld by the IHC. The Supreme Court had to see whether the decision of the high court was right and not as per the facts.

Hearing of the case was adjourned till November 8.