Tribunal to hear ex-PM Ashraf’s case tomorrow

35 candidates cleared by Rawalpindi tribunal; 58 by Karachi tribunal.

Naeem Sahoutara/fawad Ali April 14, 2013
Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf. PHOTO: FILE


The election tribunal for the Rawalpindi Division is to hear the case of former prime minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf’s nomination papers tomorrow (Monday). On Saturday, the same tribunal allowed a total of 14 candidates to contest the upcoming elections.

The former premier might have a hard time returning to the National Assembly owing to some cases that are pending against him.  The tribunal, comprising of Justice Asad Rauf Sheikh and Justice Mamoon Rashid Sheikh, also rejected the nomination papers of eight candidates, while issuing notices to one candidate.

The tribunal accepted the nomination forms of former district nazim Raja Javed Ikhlas of PML-N, after rejecting a fake degree complaint against him.

It reserved its decision in the case of Inamullah Khan Niazi, whose papers were rejected by a returning officer after declaring him a defaulter.

The tribunal also maintained the RO’s decision in the case of Hameed Rashid Noorani who had filed nomination papers from NA-74 and PP-48. His papers were rejected from both national and provincial constituencies. On the other hand, the nomination papers of his brother Saeed Akbar Noorani from NA-73 and PP-49 have been accepted.

Prominent among those whose papers have been accepted are Fakhra Zainab Zaidi from PP-11, Raja Aijaz Hussain from PP-11 and NA-55, Nareen Fatima from NA-64 Sargodha and Tariq Mehmood Murtaza.

Meanwhile, the election tribunal in Karachi allowed 58 candidates to contest election from the national and provincial assembly seats, while 26 pleas were dismissed. Headed by Justice Faisal Arab, the two-member tribunal heard total 106 petitions during day-long proceedings on Saturday.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 14th, 2013. 


Most Read


Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ