Tribunal reserves decision on Imran’s ineligibility plea

The Election Tribunal in Rawalpindi has reserved its decision after completing the hearing on the returning officer’s rejection of the nomination papers of the PTI founding chairman and former prime minister from National Assembly’s NA-89 Mianwali constituency, which will be pronounced on Jan 10.

This is the only election appeal of the Rawalpindi Election Tribunal which was heard for three hours and 40 minutes with two short breaks.

Justice Chaudhry Abdul Aziz, judge of the Election Appellate Tribunal established in the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench, heard the appeal of the PTI founding chairman.

Barrister Ali Zafar on behalf of the PTI founding chairman and Director General Arshad Malik, ADG Khurram Malik, Law Officer Zulqarnain and Deputy Attorney General Tayyab Bakharal on behalf of the ECP gave arguments.

The main point of the argument was whether the punishment in the Toshakhana reference was criminal or morally bad, while the court also raised several legal questions about it.

During the proceedings, Barrister Zafar said: "I will divide my arguments into three parts. The only important point for rejecting the documents is to have been convicted, while this conviction is not a criminal or moral turpitude, it could be a technical error in the documents. It could be a technical error in the paper statements. Yes, these statements are also declarations. Ineligibility can only be in criminal cases – murder, robbery, theft, fraud, kidnapping or moral crimes. Mistake in documents is not a crime.

Read ‘Rejection of Imran’s papers not without reason’

“In Khawaja Asif's case, the Supreme Court allowed him to contest the election under the same point on the issue of employment and not mentioning the salary, so this is not a crime. This case is different from the tripartite case.”

Justice Aziz said, “First, let's talk about moral turpitude. It is not defined in any law.”

Barrister Zafar replied, “I will answer every question of the court. The RO cannot decide whether the matter is of moral turpitude or not. Whether a person is qualified or not requires evidence. The punishment in the Toshakhana case was not criminal. There was no criminal offense, robbery, kidnapping and murder. It cannot be a crime or a moral offence.”

The Election Tribunal said that the salary was mentioned in the Khawaja Asif case. “Were the details of the things taken from the Toshakhana given? We are not discussing the merits of the Toshakhana case. Was the money earned by selling Toshakhana's items stated?”

Barrister Ali Zafar said that yes, all that was said and after the suspension of the sentence in the case, Article 63 (1)(h) was not enforceable.

Election Commission DG Law Muhammad Arshad said that the former PTI chairman had been convicted in the case and that the court said that he was not “Sadiq and Amin” (honest and trustworthy).

The former PTI chairman approached the Islamabad High Court against the decision of the trial court on which his sentence was suspended in the Toshakhana reference, he added.

Arshad said the ROs had the power to approve or reject nomination papers. “The decision of the RO should be upheld.”

Further, the nomination papers submitted by PTI leader Hamad Azhar from the National Assembly seat were rejected while those from the provincial assembly seat were accepted.

Appellate Tribunal’s Justice Tariq Nadeem pronounced the verdict in the case.

The judge dismissed Azhar's appeal from NA-129 while upholding the decision of the RO and accepted the nomination papers of Azhar and his father Mian Azhar from PP-171.

Similarly, the LHC Appellate Tribunal dismissed Sanam Javed's appeals against the rejection of papers from constituencies NA-119 and 120.