The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) will announce its verdict on Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) intra-party elections case on Thursday (today), deciding whether the party is eligible to obtain an election symbol for the upcoming general elections scheduled to be held on February 8 next year.
Earlier, the election supervisor had reserved the decision on September 13 after the PTI lawyer submitted his reply following the issuance of a show-cause notice to the party. A four-member bench led by Nisar Durrani heard the case.
The PTI intra-party polls has been pending before the ECP since 2022.
The ECP requires political parties to conduct intra-party elections before every five years, and the parties can hold the polls in three or four years as enshrined in their respective constitutions.
In August, PTI Chairman Imran Khan did not appear before the ECP despite having been served a final notice over the party's failure to hold intra-party elections.
Read also: Govt fails to produce Imran before ECP
The electoral watchdog had summoned the PTI chief, warning him that if he failed to appear before the commission, the ECP might – under Section 215 (5) of the Elections Act, 2017 – declare his party ineligible to obtain an election symbol for future polls.
Referring to Section 209(1) of the Elections Act, the ECP pointed out that every registered political party was bound to provide the commission with a certificate about the holding of its intra-party polls.
The PTI’s intra-party elections were scheduled to be held on June 13 in 2021 under the party’s constitution.
In May last year, the commission issued a show-cause notice to Imran for his failure to hold intra-party elections of the PTI in his capacity as its chairman.
The ECP extended the date at the request of the PTI, allowing it to conduct its intra-party elections by June 13, 2022. However, the former ruling party failed to hold its intra-party polls even by the new date.
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