The Supreme Court resumed on Saturday the hearing of Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) petition challenging the Peshawar High Court’s (PHC) verdict restoring the PTI’s electoral symbol of ‘bat’.
A three-member bench, comprising the CJP, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Musarrat Hilali, is hearing the case. The hearing is being broadcast live on the apex court’s website.
While hearing the electoral body’s petition challenging the Peshawar High Court’s (PHC) decision to restore PTI’s electoral symbol, Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa on Friday remarked that they wanted the next polls to be held in the country.
The PHC annulled the ECP’s ruling that revoked the PTI’s cherished electoral symbol citing irregularities in the party’s internal polls.
The CJP pointed out yesterday that the high court in its decision had ordered the provision of the electoral symbol and certificate to the PTI but not issued the declaration of its intra-party elections.
As the hearing commenced today, the chief justice said the PHC has issued its detailed order. PTI’s counsel Hamid Khan took the rostrum. PTI lawyer Ali Zafar and the party’s chief election commissioner Niazullah Niazi and chairman Barrister Gohar were also present in the courtroom.
Hamid said he would try to wrap up his arguments soon as today was the last day to submit party tickets to ECP. Justice Isa agreed that the court also has less time as the order needs to be issued, hinting that the verdict would be announced today.
Justice Mazhar then posed two questions, whether the ECP has the authority to investigate intra-party polls and whether the apex court has jurisdiction.
PTI’s counsel stated that the electoral body does not have the right to review a party’s intra-party polls under the Elections Act 2017 or the Constitution.
He maintained that the ECP had “discriminated” against PTI and added that none of the party’s members had challenged the intra-party election and reiterated that those challenging were not party members.
Zafar added that the commission had not mentioned any irregularity in its Dec 22 order and the reasons given were “strange”.
CJP Isa asked the lawyer to provide context to the court for the allegations against ECP and to keep the “arguments legal”.
After further back and forth, the CJP observed that the party’s constitution stated that the “chairman shall be elected every two years while others every three years. Violation of the party constitution is proved to this extent”.
The top judge observed that PTI was served a notice by ECP when the party was in the government. Justice Mazhar asked whether the party had followed the election schedule it issued and were the intra-party polls transparent.
“You ask for a level-playing field but would also have to give the same to party members.”
Justice Mazhar observed that irregularities pointed out by the ECP are from PTI’s constitution itself, to which the party’s counsel said that the ECP has not identified any concerning election schedule and venue.
The CJP then said the matter is whether the inter-party polls were conducted or not.
Zafar reiterated that the ECP did not have the authority to scrutinise inter-party elections, however, Justice Isa said the counsel had himself stated that the electoral body could impose a fine for not properly holding polls but is arguing simultaneously that the ECP does not have authority.
The bench further questioned the manner in which the polls were held and questioned the lack of evidence for arguments presented in court.
