The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Friday decided to file a civil miscellaneous application (CMA) in the Lahore High Court (LHC) praying the court to expunge its remarks on the issue of changing allotted election symbols.
The electoral body said it would take the matter to a higher forum if its application faces rejection. "The honourable court has passed remarks against the commission without attributing any failure on the part of the commission, particularly when the petitioners themselves have sought issuance of a writ against the ROs for allotment of symbol," the petition reads.
"Therefore, the commission has decided to approach the court by filing a CMA for the expunction of the remarks," the ECP said, adding that the court had made remarks against the commission without specifying any shortcomings.
"The ECP is aware of its responsibility, which it fulfils on time," emphasised the electoral body.
The decision follows the LHC Bahawalpur bench's directive on January 16, in response to writ petitions filed by various candidates regarding the allocation of election symbols. The court, dissatisfied with the performance of the ECP and one of its returning officers (ROs), remarked that they were not fulfilling their duties in accordance with the law.
Read: ECP releases roster of candidates contesting in polls
The LHC had questioned the absence of a specific symbol being assigned to a candidate when the symbol "charpoy" had not been allotted to any other contender.
The court issued notices to the concerned officials, directing them to appear in person to address the concerns raised in the writ petitions.
The court said that the ROs and the ECP were violating the law and failing to perform their duties as per legal requirements.
On January 17, the regional election commissioner, district election commissioner, and ROs appeared before the LHC bench, informing them that the CEC was preoccupied with general election activities.
Consequently, the LHC bench decided that the candidate should be allotted the electoral symbol of their choice.
Candidates ‘misled’ LHC
In response, the ECP has said that candidates, who complained to the LHC about not obtaining their preferred symbols, had "misled" the court as they had not initially approached the electoral body on the matter.
Emphasising that ROs have the authority to allot election symbols under Section 67 of the Elections Act 2017, the ECP argued that the LHC passed verbal directions without hearing their side of the issue.
Read: LHC reserves decision on Imran’s ECP disqualification
Complaining about the LHC's interference despite the printing of ballot papers commencing on January 14, the ECP stressed that any change in Form 33 would cause a delay in the election, particularly in light of the need to print around 260 million ballot papers for the February 8 polls.
In response, the ECP decided to file a CMA for the expunction of the court's remarks, asserting that it would approach a higher forum if the petition faced rejection.
Symbol withdrawal challenged
Meanwhile, in a separate legal development, Section 215 of the Election Act faced a challenge in the LHC after electoral symbol was withdrawn by the ECP from a candidate.
Candidate Mian Shabbir initiated the legal action, filing the application through Azhar Siddique Advocate. The ECP, federal government, and other relevant parties have been named as respondents in the petition.
The petition argues that Section 215 of the Election Act is inconsistent with the constitution, citing several judgments by the Supreme Court that emphasise party elections having no impact on general elections.
It contended that the provision in question contradicts the principles outlined in Article 17 of the Constitution, which permits the banning of a political party only under specific circumstances.
Pointing out that Section 215 allows the withdrawal of an election symbol from any political party, the petition raises concerns about potential interference with the rights of representative parties and voters.
According to the petition, such interference could restrict the electorate's freedom to vote as per their own preferences.
The petitioner urged the court to declare Section 215 of the Election Act null and void.
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