Counsel denies Afridi intimidated election staff

KP CM's lawyer challenges ECP jurisdiction to hear case brought by Haripur election candidate

ISLAMABAD:

A hearing at the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Monday saw heated exchanges as lawyers representing Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi challenged the commission’s jurisdiction in a case alleging intimidation of election staff during the Haripur by-election.

The ECP had initiated proceedings after Sohail Afridi was accused of making threatening remarks during a public rally in Abbottabad, where he allegedly warned officials of consequences if election-day misconduct occurred. The Commission said such statements put at risk the “safety of polling staff, police and voters” and potentially violated the code of conduct prohibiting public officeholders from influencing elections.

The proceedings opened with complaints from lawyer Ali Bukhari and the Advocate General KP, who said lawyers were mistreated at the ECP. Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikandar Sultan Raja apologised, assuring action against the officers responsible.

Read: ECP takes notice of K-P CM's remarks

He said the stoppages at the gate were due to security requirements. In an informal exchange, the CEC told lawyer Naeem Panjhutha that he had even received a vote from the CEC’s own household, to which Panjhutha replied he was aware.

Special Secretary ECP maintained that Article 218(3) clearly outlines the commission’s powers and said action against the KP chief minister would proceed in line with the law.

The Peshawar High Court has previously held that while Article 218(3) gives the ECP broad authority to ensure fair elections, its actions must still be grounded in statutory powers. This precedent has been cited in recent challenges involving the ECP’s jurisdiction.

"Lawyers were being stopped and humiliated at the entrance and added that he himself had also been stopped", said Ali Bukhari. He reiterated that the ECP lacked the jurisdiction to hear the matter, saying a notice had already been issued by the District Monitoring Officer (DMO) in the constituency.

He questioned whether the case could run before two forums simultaneously, pointing out that he had been summoned by the DMO prior to being summoned by the ECP and had again been called to submit a reply on the 27th.

Read more: K-P CM challenges ECP code of conduct notice in PHC

Afridi has already moved the Peshawar High Court, calling the ECP notice “malicious” and arguing that it was issued without a mandatory report from the District Monitoring Officer, a core part of his challenge that mirrors Bukhari’s argument in the hearing.

Bukhari insisted that the petition filed by Babar Nawaz should be heard together with his own and warned that summoning their side over a political rally in Abbottabad would “open a new Pandora’s box.”

He also questioned whether the ECP would summon the prime minister and the Punjab chief minister for similar actions, noting that Punjab’s chief minister had announced development projects worth Rs2.5 billion in Hassan Abdal. He argued that violations of the code of conduct had taken place elsewhere without any summons being issued.

The controversy has already triggered political backlash, with PML-N leaders accusing Afridi of issuing threats to election officials. Punjab Information Minister Uzma Bukhari publicly criticised him, calling him “a habitual liar” and referring to his alleged warning that officers “would not see tomorrow’s sun.”

Chairman Election Commission responded by saying that action would be taken “without discrimination” and clarified that if the prime minister had made such a speech before the election, he too would have been issued a notice. Ministers and candidates in other constituencies had in fact been summoned over code-of-conduct violations, he added.

Babar Nawaz’s counsel, Sajeel Swati, argued that the KP chief minister had clearly threatened election staff and emphasised that the ECP’s authority did not cease merely because a monitoring officer had imposed a fine.

Bukhari pressed the commission to first decide on the maintainability of the case. The ECP directed the KP chief minister’s lawyer to submit a written reply at the next hearing and said an appropriate order on maintainability would be issued. The commission granted Sohail Afridi exemption from appearing at the next hearing and adjourned proceedings until December 4.

Later, Afridi’s lawyer formally challenged the ECP’s jurisdiction, raising objections to the maintainability of the petitions. The commission reserved its decision on Afridi’s application.

Salman Akram Raja said Sohail Afridi had appeared before the ECP and complied with the law. A White Paper on the Haripur elections would be issued soon and added that they would continue to examine the “spirit of the law”, he added.

Also read: PML-N's Azma rebuffs K-P CM's claims

"Bukhari had placed objections before the commission and maintained that all parties should be treated equally." He added that the KP chief minister had not threatened anyone, saying it was within the chief minister’s right to admonish officers. He said a detailed reply would be submitted to the ECP.

The legal team said a similar petition was already pending before the ECP in KP and argued that identical cases could not proceed in two separate places. They maintained that there had been no interference in the election process and that the chief minister would not need to appear again.

Bukhari said they had based their arguments on two points, including that the matter had been taken up under Article 218, and added that they would appear before the returning officer in Haripur since the case was already being heard there. He also said they had submitted details regarding the Punjab chief minister’s husband in support of their position.

The case stems from complaints filed by Babar Nawaz, the by-election candidate, who accused Afridi of using his position to intimidate the administration. His petition argues that the ECP must act against any public officeholder attempting to influence an electoral contest, an argument reinforced by the Commission’s earlier directive to its provincial chapter and the KP police chief to review Afridi’s remarks.