The Peshawar High Court (PHC) has once again intervened to prevent the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) from making a final decision on its second notice sent to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) for the party’s failure to complete necessary documentation and formalities after intra-party elections.
During proceedings, the PHC directed the concerned petitioners to present themselves before the ECP to pursue their case.
The PTI submitted a supplementary application, urging the court to merge it with the original writ on December 19 and to restrain the commission from giving a final ruling.
A two-member bench of the PHC, comprising Justice Faheem Wali and Justice Shakeel Ahmed, heard the plea on Friday.
PTI's chief Barrister Gohar Khan apprised the court that the party's intra-party elections were conducted in Peshawar on December 2, where he secured an uncontested victory as the party chairman.
He highlighted that Akbar S. Babar, a founding member of the party who is not a current member, filed a petition against this election in the ECP.
"According to sections 208 and 209 of the Election Act 2017, intra-party elections occur every five years and are conducted within a party based on its own constitution."
He further mentioned that the PHC had previously restrained the ECP from reaching a final verdict on the earlier notice, scheduling a hearing for December 19.
Despite this, He lamented that another notice was issued to PTI which cited non-compliance with requirements for publishing the party election certificate in the gazette.
He said the party complied with legal prerequisites. "All the essentials required for publishing the chairman's certificate have been fulfilled."
He pleaded with the court to instruct the ECP to publish the party's certificate, urging that the commission's additional notices were unnecessary after confirming compliance during previous court appearances.
He said that in the second notice by the ECP, an order to appear before the commission on December 18 has been issued.
He argued that the ECP is biased in its treatment of PTI and its ‘bat’ symbol, asserting that it lacks the jurisdiction to entertain a petition against a party election.
Concluding the hearing, the PHC restrained the ECP from passing a final verdict and adjourned the proceedings till December 19.
LHCA Lahore High Court’s larger bench issuing notices sought replies from concerned quarters on PTI’s founding chairman Imran Khan’s two petitions challenging his five years disqualification in response to the conviction in Toshakhana reference by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) as well as its declaration to null and void the PTI’s intra party election (IPE).
The larger bench headed by Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan was also hearing PTI’s third plea challenging disqualification by the ECP in Toshakhana reference over making false statements and incorrect declaration.
As proceedings commenced, the bench noticed the absence of the ECP’s counsel and remarked it would not be appropriate to run the proceedings in his absence.
On a point Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan expressed his concern over the bench’s jurisdiction observing when a matter wherein ECP’s order in Toshakhana case had been challenged in Islamabad High Court (IHC) so how two matters could be heard at different courts.Replying bench’s query, the petitioner’s counsel Barrister Ali Zafar argued that they had filed a withdrawal application in IHC but it did not accept the withdrawal application.
Under such situation this bench will see whether or not this plea could be heard by this bench, Justice Shahid Bilal remarked. Responding it, Barrister Ali Zafar argued that petitions could be heard at two forums but it is the petitioner’s choice from where he decides to withdraw but the court’s remarks that this court will hear this petition despite petitioner’s withdrawal is astonishing.
However, the bench directed Barrister Ali Zafar to argue upon how this bench could hear the same plea which is pending before IHC. The bench remarked that this bench will decide these pleas after hearing detailed arguments upon jurisdiction, maintainability and merits.
Barrister Ali Zafar expressed urgency in deciding these matters arguing at one side the Supreme Court of Pakistan had directed to conduct the general elections and on the other hand ECP is likely to announce its schedule. We do not want delay in decision of these petitions adding any delay can deprive the popular leader Imran Khan of contesting general elections.
A larger bench of the Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday issued notices to concerned authorities on two petitions by former premier Imran Khan challenging his five-year disqualification in the Toshakhana reference and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) declaring PTI's intra-party polls as null and void.
The bench, headed by Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan, was also hearing a third petition by the party challenging the disqualification by the ECP in the Toshakhana reference for allegedly making false statements and submitting an incorrect declaration.
During the proceedings today, the bench observed the absence of ECP's counsel and remarked that it would not be appropriate to conduct the proceedings in his absence.
Justice Hassan also expressed his concern over the bench's jurisdiction, observing that the matter of ECP's order in the Toshakhana case is also being heard in the Islamabad High Court (IHC), and questioned how could the same matter be heard in two different courts.
Replying to the reservations raised by the bench, Imran's counsel Barrister Ali Zafar argued that they had filed a withdrawal application in the IHC but the court did not accept the motion.
Justice Hassan then replied that it will now be determined by the bench whether it can hear the plea or not. Zafar replied that petitions can be heard in two forums but it is the petitioner's discretion from where he decides to withdraw a plea.
However, the bench directed the counsel to argue how the bench could hear the same plea which is pending before IHC. and remarked that this bench will decide these pleas after hearing detailed arguments upon jurisdiction, maintainability and merits.
Zafar expressed urgency in deciding the matters put before the bench, arguing that on one side the Supreme Court had directed to conduct the general elections and on the other hand ECP is likely to announce its schedule.
"We do not want a delay in the decision of these petitions," he said adding that any delay can deprive a popular leader such as Imran the chance of contesting general elections.
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