Banana republic or London plan? Supreme Court ruling on reserved seats cannot be implemented under new law: NA speaker Ayaz Sadiq

[The Bald Eagle]

In a letter to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), Speaker of the National Assembly Sardar Ayaz Sadiq on Thursday stated that the Supreme Court’s judgment on reserved seats “cannot be implemented under the Amended Election Act, 2017”

In July, the SC declared Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) eligible for seats reserved for women and minorities, dealing a major setback to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s ruling coalition.

PTI-backed candidates, who had contested and won the February 8 elections as independents after their party was stripped of its election symbol, had joined the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) to form a coalition of convenience.

The ECP had raised concerns about who in the PTI should be contacted for verification, given the party’s lack of structure and unrecognised intra-party elections, suggesting that the election regulator might need to seek further directions from the court.

Last week, however, the SC rebuked the “misconceived” request by the ECP seeking clarification regarding its verdict and ordered the “immediate implementation” of its original directions.

Earlier today, the ECP remained undecided on the implementation of SC’s verdict and held a meeting to deliberate on the apex court’s judgment and its September 14 order in response to the clarification sought by the commission, sources told Dawn.

In light of the development, the speaker’s letter, a copy of which is available with Dawn.com, acknowledged the SC’s ruling, stating, “The Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan… has directed the [ECP]… to allow independent returned candidates to join another political party months after already joining a political party as a result of the General Elections 2024”.

However, the letter stated that the ruling was issued on July 7, with amendments to the Elections Act, 2017 passed on August 7 with presidential assent. The letter highlighted amendments to Sections 66 and 104-A in particular.

According to Section 66, “Provided that if a candidate, before seeking allotment of a prescribed symbol, has not filed a declaration before the Returning Officer about his affiliation with a particular political party by submitting party certificate from the political party confirming that he is that party’s candidate, he shall be deemed to be considered as an independent candidate and not a candidate of any political party.”

Meanwhile, Section 104-A states: “Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or rules or any other law, for the time being in force, or a judgment, decree or order of any court including the Supreme Court and a High Court, the declaration, consent or affidavit, by whatever name called, of an independent returned candidate once given for joining a political party shall be irrevocable and cannot be substituted or withdrawn.”

The letter said that in the context of the Amended Election Act, which was passed after the SC verdict, the ruling on reserved seats cannot be implemented under the new law.

“As the Judgement of the SC was rendered based on the law prior to the enactment of the amendment, the said judgment is now incapable of implementation.”

The speaker’s letter added that the amended act would “supersede” the SC’s ruling and that the apex court recognised this decision. It also stated that the ECP had a “statutory obligation” to honour laws enacted by parliament.

‘The PTI cannot reverse the clock’: Atta Tarar​

Information Minister Attaulah Tarar praised the speaker’s decision to “uphold parliament’s sovereignty” and slammed the PTI’s attempts to cross the floor of the house.

“The PTI cannot reverse the clock and decide to join any party they wish,” Tarar said during a televised address on Thursday. “They opened the floodgates, allowing anyone to join any party at whim.”

Hailing the speaker’s letter as a “milestone” in Pakistan’s parliamentary history, the information minister said that the speaker maintains parliamentary sovereignty, giving examples of when he issued production orders for arrested PTI lawmakers last week.

“In the constitution, parliament is recognised as sovereign because the people elect leaders who enact laws and can amend the constitution,” Tarar said. “No other branch has the power to do that.”

“The speaker correctly identified in his letter that independent candidates had 48 hours to join a party after winning,” Tarar continued. “How can the PTI change the fact that they joined SIC, moreover, how can they convince members to join another party?”

Source: Dawn News

 

[Bewal Express]

The SC ruling can't be back dated to suit the mafia. Criminals that won 50 seats because they sided with the retarded Mistry are now claiming a 2/3rd majority

 

[The Bald Eagle]

The SC ruling can't be back dated to suit the mafia. Criminals that won 50 seats because they sided with the retarded Mistry are now claiming a 2/3rd majority

It would be fun see them cry. Let's hope Justice Mansoor starts with a bang

 

[The Bald Eagle]

The government thinks Pakistan is a banana republic, PTI and Judiciary must stand against this non sense now

 

[The Bald Eagle]

How come one with such "WISDOM" could be CJP ​

=====

Forms-45 irrelevant compared to votes, says CJP Qazi Faez Isa​

The Supreme Court of Pakistan has dismissed a petition filed by Ghulam Rasool of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), challenging the election result of PB-14 and accusing returning officers of bias. The court upheld the victory of Mahmood Khan from the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N).

Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa, while hearing the case on Thursday, questioned the petitioner's lawyer about the basis of his claim that the election results were manipulated. The lawyer argued that the results did not match the data on Forms-45 and accused the officers of partiality.

In response, Chief Justice Isa emphasised the primacy of votes as the most critical evidence in elections, stating, "Forms-45 are filled out by presiding officers; the real evidence is the votes themselves."

He further suggested that any objections should focus on the recount process, such as whether the ballot boxes were tampered with.

The lawyer persisted in alleging fraud by the presiding officers, claiming he was unfairly labelled as dishonest without evidence. However, the chief justice maintained that decisions are made based on facts and records, not on accusations, and challenged the lawyer to prove the presiding officers' bias by demonstrating any familial ties.

Concluding the hearing, the chief justice asserted, "Even if the presiding officer is an enemy, the decision is determined by the votes. Forms-45 hold no significance in comparison." The court thus rejected the request for a recount in seven of the 96 polling stations, affirming Mahmood Khan's electoral success.

The context of the case relates to allegations from the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), led by Imran Khan, accusing the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) of tampering with Forms-45 in multiple constituencies following the February 8 elections.

PTI claimed that the ECP had initially released the forms but later altered them on their website, leading to suspicions of electoral malpractice. The party pointed to irregularities across Balochistan, Sindh, and other provinces, including discrepancies where vote counts exceeded the number of registered voters at certain polling stations.

Source: The Express Tribune

 

[Bewal Express]

It would be fun see them cry. Let's hope Justice Mansoor starts with a bang

I still think Isa will find/ will be forced upon a poor country . Isa is a guarantor for NS and the retard. If he goes and they lose control, these crooks with Isa himself may face article 6 and the noose. People have been murdered at the behest of these criminals

 

[Bewal Express]

The government thinks Pakistan is a banana republic, PTI and Judiciary must stand against this non sense now

The Judiciary and parts of the PTI are also under the control of the retarded Mistry. The lawyers are even more compromised. I don't see any good in the short term.

 

[Kianig89]

The day might near when the masses get hold of this black sheep and lynch him, it will be unlawful and that's how the business works in banana state.

 

[Bewal Express]

The Thugs have decided not to accept a SC ruling because they have guns. This badmashi will bring short term relief but as Mush found nothing lasts forever and ONE DAY they will face the music. if they dont we as country will continue to go backwards.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Practice and Procedure Ordinance: CJ changes judges committee​

Implementing the Practice and Procedure Ordinance 2024, the Chief Justice of Pakistan changed the construction of the judges' committee with Justice Aminuddin as part of it and expulsion of Justice Munib Akhtar.

The registrar Supreme Court issued the notification in this regard.

More to read: Cabinet approves Practice and Procedure Amendment Ordinance

It is said that Justice Aminuddin Khan stands in the fifth position on the seniority list. The three judges committee constitute benches that hear different cases.

The reshuffle comes in the wake of the Practice and Procedure Ordinance 2024, which was signed into law by President Asif Ali Zardari.

According to the Supreme Court's Registrar, the newly constituted committee, apart from the Chief Justice, includes the senior-most judge, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, alongside Justice Aminuddin Khan. Sources revealed that the first meeting of the restructured committee is likely to be convened on Monday.

Practice and Procedure Ordinance 2024

It is to be recalled that The federal cabinet on Friday approved the Practice and Procedure Amendment Ordinance 2024 which gives more powers to the chief justice.

The ordinance, which amends the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act 2023, will be sent to the president for approval.

Under the amendment to the Act, the chief justice of Pakistan can nominate a judge in case of unavailability of a committee member.

The Act provided that the chief justice of Pakistan will constitute a three-member committee “comprising the Chief Justice of Pakistan and two next most senior Judges, in order of seniority” to hear “every cause, appeal or matter before the Supreme Court.”

Source: Dunya News

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Why cant the minority community elect their own representatives directly like the rest of the Muslims of Pakistan?

 

[FearlessRoar]

NA secretariat issues revised party position sans disputed reserved seats

The National Assembly secretariat has issued its revised party position list in the lower house of parliament reflecting each political party's standings excluding the disputed reserved seats.

The list — issued by the electoral body on September 18 i.e., prior to the Speaker Ayaz Sadiq's letter to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) regarding the Supreme Court's July 12 verdict — does not include the 15 reserved seats given to the Pakistan Muslim-League-Nawaz (PML-N), and the five and three seats given to the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JIU-F).

The development comes a day after NA Speaker Sadiq, in his letter to the ECP termed the top court's ruling "incapable of implementation" after the amendments to the Election Act 2017.

The letter refers to the apex court's decision which declared the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) eligible for reserved seats, essentially paving the way for the resurrection of the Imran Khan-founded party in the assemblies.

Following the decision, the electoral body had notified 93 lawmakers as belonging to the PTI in various legislatures.

However, the incumbent ruling coalition then bulldozed the Elections (Second Amendment) Act, 2024 and Elections (Second Amendment) Bill, 2024 in the NA and the Senate on August 6, respectively and the legislation came into force with President Asif Ali Zardari's assent on August 9.

In his letter to the ECP, Sadiq underscored two "particular provisions" — amendments to Section 66 and Section 104-A, which he said, were relevant for the Election Commission’s consideration.

In its amendment to Section 66 of the Elections Act, the bill says that if a candidate does not submit a declaration of his affiliation with a political party to the returning officer (RO) before seeking allotment of the election symbol, they shall be "deemed to be considered as an independent candidate and not a candidate of any political party".

Meanwhile, the amendment to Section 104 reads that the declaration, consent or affidavit, by whatever name called, of an independent returned candidate once given for joining a political party shall be irrevocable and cannot be substituted or withdrawn.

Furthermore, the letter pointed out Section 1 (2) of the Amended Election Act, which states that the said amendments will have a retrospective effect from 2017 when the Election Act 2017 was passed.

The new party position issued by the NA secretariat on September 18, shows a total of 213 lawmakers on treasury benches including PML-N's 110 MNAs, PPP (69); Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (22), Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (5); Istehkam-e-Pakistan Party (4) and one lawmaker each from Pakistan Muslim League-Zia, Balochistan Awami Party and National Party.

Meanwhile, the opposition benches include 80 SIC members along with eight lawmakers of the JIU-F.

Eight PTI-backed independent MNAs along with one lawmaker each from Pashtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP), Balochistan National Party-Mengal and Wahdat-e-Muslimeen are also part of the opposition.

Whereas, an independent lawmaker sitting in the opposition has joined the PML-N, the NA secretariat said.

The list doesn't include the 15 reserved seats given to the PML-N along with five and three seats given to the PPP and the JIU-F.

The number of members in the National Assembly is 313 — without the 23 reserved seats — and the number will be pushed to 336 once the empty and disputed seats are given to the PTI.

NA secretariat issues revised party position sans disputed reserved seats

Ruling coalition comprises 213 lawmakers.List doesn't include disputed reserved seats.80 PTI-backed MNAs declared SIC members.ISLAMABAD: The National Assembly secretariat has issued its revised...

www.geo.tv

 

[Bewal Express]

SC ruling thrown into the bin by criminals. Total Badmashi under retarded Mistry and the Junta

 

[The Bald Eagle]

I know Justice Mansoor won't sit quite because it's not only about Pakistan now but his CJship is under risk too.

 

[Bewal Express]

I know Justice Mansoor won't sit quite because it's not only about Pakistan now but his CJship is under risk too.

He undermined Bandial with his support of the crooked Isa. The mafia are like snakes- they have no friends or scruples, they just kill. It's too late for PK in the short term. In the long term, their will be quite a few that are noosed

 

[The Bald Eagle]

He undermined Bandial with his support of the crooked Isa. The mafia are like snakes- they have no friends or scruples, they just kill. It's too late for PK in the short term. In the long term, their will be quite a few that are noosed

Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan shouldn't have resigned, it appears the non political pressure groups black mailed him with some serious stuff.

 

[Savak]

The ruling elite does this because they know they have nothing to fear from the masses and even if people come to the streets, the army, security forces will take care of things with their barbarism and people cannot stand an all out assault by the state against them and their family members for long.

 

[Bewal Express]

Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan shouldn't have resigned, it appears the non political pressure groups black mailed him with some serious stuff.

Agree but all these judges enabled the Junta to take hold. Justice Mansoors epiphany came too late for PK. When you have a psychotic retard in charge of guns, a total and immoral retard heading the SC and puppets with stolen seats willing to pass a constitutional amendment without knowing what's in the bill, your country is deep dodoo.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Reserved seats: PTI moves SC after NA speaker’s letter to ECP

PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan filed a plea through Aziz Karamat Bhandari after National Assembly Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq wrote a letter to the ECP.

Sardar Ayaz Sadiq through his letter asked the ECP not to allocate reserved seats to the, maintaining that the Supreme Court’s (SC) ruling is now “incapable of implementation” after the amendments to the Election Act 2017.

Following the letter, the PTI moved the apex court and sought its clarification on the letter written by the NA speaker National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq and Punjab Assembly’s custodian Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on the matter of reserved seats.

In the fresh plea, PTI’s Barrister Gohar argued that the NA speaker’s letter does not set out the correct constitutional and legal position and has no legal effect on the SC’s 12 July order that declared the party eligible for reserved seats.

“ECP is bound to implement the short order in letter and spirit,” the petition read.

The court was requested to restrain the ECP from allocating the subject reserved seats to any other party till the matter is decided.

Reserved seats: PTI moves SC after NA speaker's letter to ECP

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on Saturday approached the Supreme Court (SC), requesting it to restrain the Election Commission of Pakistan

arynews.tv

 

[The Bald Eagle]

CJP seeks clarification from SC registrar on reserved seats case​

Chief Justice of Pakistan, Qazi Faez Isa, has demanded answers from the Supreme Court’s Deputy Registrar regarding a miscellaneous application filed by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on reserved seats. The Chief Justice raised nine questions in response to an explanation provided by eight judges in the case.

Chief Justice Isa questioned the timing of the applications filed by both the ECP and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). He asked why these applications were not forwarded to the Practice and Procedure Committee. Additionally, he inquired how the hearing was scheduled without a cause list and why relevant notices were not issued to the concerned parties, including the attorney general.

The chief justice also asked in which courtroom or chamber the applications were heard and why a cause list was not issued for the hearing. He raised concerns about the original file and order being uploaded without being submitted to the Supreme Court Registrar.

Furthermore, Chief Justice Isa requested an explanation on who ordered the publication of the order on the Supreme Court’s website.

Earlier in the day, PTI approached the Supreme Court, filing a petition regarding the allocation of reserved seats. PTI's counsel, Uzair Bhandari, argued that the amendment to the Election Act does not apply to the Supreme Court's July 12 decision and that the ECP is bound to implement that decision.

PTI's petition seeks a court declaration stating that the National Assembly speaker’s letter regarding the July 12 decision holds no legal value. PTI also requests that the ECP reject the NA speaker's letter and halt the distribution of reserved seats to other political parties.

The PTI has urged the Supreme Court to ensure the ECP complies with the July 12 ruling and blocks the allocation of these seats to other political entities.

This development follows a recent letter by Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq to the ECP, urging respect for parliamentary sovereignty in allocating reserved seats to PTI. The speaker referenced the Elections (Second Amendment) Act, 2024, which restricts party-switching by independent candidates and overrides the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling.

Source: The Express Tribune

 

[FearlessRoar]

Supreme Court issues detailed verdict of reserved seats case​

The Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP) has released a 70-page judgment regarding the reserved seats case of the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC).

SC Justice Mansoor Ali Shah wrote a 70-page verdict.

The detailed verdict stated that the stakes in the election fundamentally lie with the people, highlighting the unique nature of election disputes compared to other civil matters.

The judgment aims to clarify legal principles and procedures involved in electoral issues, reinforcing the importance of a fair and transparent electoral process.

Supreme Court issues 70-page detailed verdict of reserved seats case

SC Justice Mansoor Ali Shah wrote a 70-page verdict

www.samaa.tv

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Highlights from SC verdict:

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah had announced the majority verdict, which was supported by seven other judges: Justices Munib Akhtar, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha A. Malik, Athar Minallah, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Shahid Waheed and Irfan Saadat Khan.

The case had been heard by a 13-member bench — Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail had penned a minority judgment; Justices Aminuddin Khan and Naeem Akhtar Afghan in their ruling had rejected the pleas for reserved seats; and Justice Yahya Afridi had ordered the electoral watchdog to decide the matter.

The eight judges had ruled that out of a list of 80 MNAs, 39 belonged to the PTI, and gave 41 others the chance to resubmit their party affiliation. Despite the 8-5 split, 11 out of the 13 judges had declared the PTI a parliamentary party.

The 70-page judgment released today, available on the SC’s website, was authored by Justice Shah, who is set to succeed incumbent CJP Isa as the top judge in October.

The verdict states: “When election authorities engage in actions […] such as unlawfully denying the recognition of a major political party and treating its nominated candidates as independents, they not only compromise the rights of these candidates but also significantly infringe upon the rights of the electorate and corrode their own institutional legitimacy.”

“The importance of free and fair elections in a democracy cannot be overstated. The judiciary’s role in ensuring electoral integrity and upholding the will of the people is essential for sustaining public trust in the democratic process,” the order read.

The SC asserted that the “court’s power to do ‘complete justice’ is a critical tool in preventing democratic backsliding and protecting democracy effectively”.

The eight-judge order also expressed “some doubts” about whether the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had the “power to reject the certificate of intra-party elections submitted by a political party under Section 209, and whether the Commission exercised its discretion under Section 215(5) justly, fairly and reasonably in PTI’s case”, emphasising that the “fundamental right of citizens to vote for the political party of their choice was at stake”.

“Similarly, we have certain reservations about how the matter of intraparty elections — a matter of internal governance of party — can trump the fundamental rights of citizens to vote and of political parties to effectively participate in and contest elections through obtaining a common symbol for their candidates, guaranteed under Articles 17(2) and 19 of the Constitution.

“However, since these questions are sub judice in the review petition filed by PTI against this Court’s judgment dated 13 January 2024, we abstain from examining and expressing our definitive view on them,” the verdict said, referring to the SC ruling denying the PTI its party symbol.

The verdict stated that Justice Mazhar wished to “make clear that nothing in this paragraph is intended to or will impact upon the hearing of the review petition”.

Furthermore, the judges stated that their clarification dated September 14, passed on the ECP’s application, “shall also be read as part of this judgment”. The clarification had rebuked the ECP for its “adoption of dilatory tactics […] to delay, defeat and obstruct implementation” of the SC ruling.

ECP’s ‘unlawful acts’ caused prejudice to PTI, electorate​

In its majority verdict, the SC also observed that the returning officers (ROs) and the ECP’s numerous “unlawful acts and omissions” had “caused confusion and prejudice to PTI, its candidates and the electorate who voted for PTI”.

“PTI’s nominated candidates were wrongly shown independent candidates in the list of contesting candidates (Form 33) by the returning officers and were also wrongly notified as independent returned candidates in the Section-98 notification by the Commission,” the judgment read.

It noted that “after the intra-party elections (which were not later accepted by the Commission), Gohar Ali Khan had assumed at least de facto charge of PTI’s functions and affairs as its chairman”.

Therefore, the SC said, the “acts performed by him on behalf of PTI” before January 13 — when the court restored the ECP verdict of not letting PTI retain its electoral symbol for the general elections — were “fully valid and effective”.

“In the present case, […] the unlawful acts and omissions of the Returning Officers and the Commission, which have caused confusion and prejudice to PTI, its candidates and the electorate who voted for PTI, are numerous,” the order read.

ECP failed to perform its role as ‘guarantor institution’ of democratic processes​

The SC verdict noted that ECP “in its role as a guarantor institution and impartial steward, is tasked with ensuring the transparency and fairness of elections to maintain public trust in the electoral system”.

“This is essential for the legitimacy of elected representatives and the stability of the political system. The Commission must uphold democratic principles and the integrity of electoral processes by ensuring that elections truly reflect the will of the people, thereby preserving the democratic fabric of the nation,” it stressed.

“Unfortunately, the circumstances of the present case indicate that the Commission has failed to fulfil this role in the general elections of 2024,” the apex court observed.

Source: Dawn News

 

[psyoptica]

The day might near when the masses get hold of this black sheep and lynch him, it will be unlawful and that's how the business works in banana state.

The only thing the masses can rally behind are the lynchings of innocent civilians in the name of blasphemy in this country.
Nothing is going to happen to the vile and corrupt politicians.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Judiciary never opposed martial Law, says Irfan Siddiqui, amid uproar over constitutional amendment​

Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Senator Irfan Siddiqui has criticised the judiciary for failing to stand against martial law, while a heated debate surrounds a recent constitutional amendment.

Speaking at a press conference in Islamabad on Wednesday, Siddiqui questioned the legal basis of recent court decisions, particularly in relation to reserved seats and party defections.

"No member in the case of reserved seats said they wanted to change parties. Under what law can the judiciary tell someone to join another party?" Siddiqui asked, adding, "The judiciary has never stood up against martial law, and now there’s an uproar over parliament's constitutional amendment."

He expressed concerns over a recent court ruling that, according to him, created unnecessary complications. "The decision regarding reserved seats has raised many questions. It has made the situation so complex that it seems impossible to resolve."

Siddiqui also criticised the frequent striking down of laws by the judiciary. "We often hear that certain laws are in conflict with the Constitution, and the judiciary interprets and rules on them. But is it possible for a judicial bench to make a mistake? What were the reasons behind such errors?" he asked, referring to the Election Act being repeatedly violated in this case.

The senator pointed to the constitutional requirement that members join a party within three days. "These people joined the Sunni Ittehad Council within the given time. The Constitution restricts this for five years, but the judiciary breaks this rule and tells the ‘birds’ to fly out of the cage and join PTI. How does the judiciary have this authority? If it has been assumed, it has been wrongly done."

He further criticised the principle of "complete justice," stating, "No member expressed a desire to switch parties. Under what law can you force them to do so? The judiciary never stood firm against martial law, and now it’s challenging parliament’s constitutional amendments. We are left wondering which direction to take."

Siddiqui concluded by pointing to Article 239 of the Constitution, which states that constitutional amendments cannot be challenged in court. "This provision has been effectively nullified, and the authority of parliament is being restricted. Due to overreach, constitutional provisions are being paralysed," he said.

Source: The Express Tribune

 

[The Bald Eagle]

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) once again approached the Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday seeking clarification on its order to grant reserved seats to the PTI

On July 12, the SC declared Imran Khan’s PTI eligible for seats reserved for women and minorities. However, in light of the Amended Election Act, 2017, the ECP remained unclear on implementing the SC’s order, requesting clarification from the apex court.

However, the SC rebuked the “misconceived” request from the Commission, ordering the immediate implementation of its original directions.

On Monday (September 23), the court released its detailed verdict of the July 12 order in the reserved seats case, which had declared the PTI a parliamentary party. Eight judges had ruled that out of a list of 80 MNAs, 39 belonged to the PTI, and granted 41 others the chance to resubmit their party affiliation.

However, the ECP appeared to be in no hurry to implement the verdict, as it held another meeting on Tuesday to carefully examine the detailed judgement, saying that it found it in contradiction to the law.

Tuesday’s meeting, like the previous nearly half a dozen such confabs, remained inconclusive and the commission decided to meet again on Wednesday and decided to approach the SC once again to clarify the matter.

According to a petition filed by the ECP on Wednesday — a copy of which is available with Dawn.com — the Commission reiterated that the Amended Election Act, 2017 was passed on August 7, whereas the SC made its initial ruling in July.

“[The] Elections (Second) Amendment Act, 2024 stood promulgated and currently exists as the law of the land,” the petition argued.

“[The] Commission finds itself in a precarious situation in as much as if it discharges the obligation forthwith, as per the order dated 14-09-2024, then it nullifies the law enacted by the Parliament and vice-versa,” the petition added.

Additionally, the ECP argued that National Assembly Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq’s letter also “nullifies” the apex court’s July 12 ruling. Sadiq had mentioned the Amended Election Act in his letter, addressed to the ECP.

Furthermore, the ECP stated it implemented the SC’s July order “by notifying the 39 candidates”, but highlighted that there was no “valid organisational structure of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf”.

Thus, the ECP once again requested clarification from the apex court on how to apply the ruling.

With regards to 41 of the returned candidates, the ECP argued it could not implement the SC’s orders due to the amendments to the election act.

The Commission requested that it “be guided with respect to the effect of the Elections (Second) Amendment Act, 2024 on the Short Order (Majority) dated 12-07-2024, Clarification Order (Majority) dated 14-09-2024 and Detailed Judgment (Majority) dated 23-09-2024, in the interests of justice,” the petition concluded.

Meanwhile, PTI leaders and legal experts have expressed concern that the ECP was not maintaining impartiality in this process.

PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan had said on Monday that despite a clear ruling from the top court, the ECP had not issued a notification confirming the PTI’s reserved seats.

“They have had four meetings now, yet they still have not notified us,” he said. “We demand that the ECP notify our reserved seats as soon as possible.”

Source: Dawn News

 

[Bewal Express]

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) once again approached the Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday seeking clarification on its order to grant reserved seats to the PTI

On July 12, the SC declared Imran Khan’s PTI eligible for seats reserved for women and minorities. However, in light of the Amended Election Act, 2017, the ECP remained unclear on implementing the SC’s order, requesting clarification from the apex court.

However, the SC rebuked the “misconceived” request from the Commission, ordering the immediate implementation of its original directions.

On Monday (September 23), the court released its detailed verdict of the July 12 order in the reserved seats case, which had declared the PTI a parliamentary party. Eight judges had ruled that out of a list of 80 MNAs, 39 belonged to the PTI, and granted 41 others the chance to resubmit their party affiliation.

However, the ECP appeared to be in no hurry to implement the verdict, as it held another meeting on Tuesday to carefully examine the detailed judgement, saying that it found it in contradiction to the law.

Tuesday’s meeting, like the previous nearly half a dozen such confabs, remained inconclusive and the commission decided to meet again on Wednesday and decided to approach the SC once again to clarify the matter.

According to a petition filed by the ECP on Wednesday — a copy of which is available with Dawn.com — the Commission reiterated that the Amended Election Act, 2017 was passed on August 7, whereas the SC made its initial ruling in July.

“[The] Elections (Second) Amendment Act, 2024 stood promulgated and currently exists as the law of the land,” the petition argued.

“[The] Commission finds itself in a precarious situation in as much as if it discharges the obligation forthwith, as per the order dated 14-09-2024, then it nullifies the law enacted by the Parliament and vice-versa,” the petition added.

Additionally, the ECP argued that National Assembly Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq’s letter also “nullifies” the apex court’s July 12 ruling. Sadiq had mentioned the Amended Election Act in his letter, addressed to the ECP.

Furthermore, the ECP stated it implemented the SC’s July order “by notifying the 39 candidates”, but highlighted that there was no “valid organisational structure of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf”.

Thus, the ECP once again requested clarification from the apex court on how to apply the ruling.

With regards to 41 of the returned candidates, the ECP argued it could not implement the SC’s orders due to the amendments to the election act.

The Commission requested that it “be guided with respect to the effect of the Elections (Second) Amendment Act, 2024 on the Short Order (Majority) dated 12-07-2024, Clarification Order (Majority) dated 14-09-2024 and Detailed Judgment (Majority) dated 23-09-2024, in the interests of justice,” the petition concluded.

Meanwhile, PTI leaders and legal experts have expressed concern that the ECP was not maintaining impartiality in this process.

PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan had said on Monday that despite a clear ruling from the top court, the ECP had not issued a notification confirming the PTI’s reserved seats.

“They have had four meetings now, yet they still have not notified us,” he said. “We demand that the ECP notify our reserved seats as soon as possible.”

Source: Dawn News

A corrupt and total incompetent election commission totally destroyed any hope of PK developing as democratic nation. Hopefully Raja will face the same abuse if ever seen in public

 

[FearlessRoar]

Reserved seats: ECP files review against SC's Sept 14 explanation

The ongoing legal battle between the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and the Supreme Court on the issue of reserved seats has intensified, as the ECP filed a review petition challenging the Supreme Court's explanation issued on September 14.

The petition asserts that the election commission is not responsible for delays in the court's decisions, and refers to a request for clarification made on July 25 regarding the court's decision on reserved seats delivered on July 12.

It states that the Supreme Court issued an order on the clarification request on September 14. It further asks when the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was issued a court issue notice seeking a reply. "Neither the election commission was issued a notice on the PTI's document nor was a reply sought," the review plea mentioned.

In its review petition, the ECP says that on its request for clarification, parliament enacted a new law. It has requested the Supreme Court to review its explanation of September 14 issued on the ECP's petition.

After several consultation meetings on the court's July 12 majority decision, the election commission has again asked the Supreme Court for another explanation.

It argues that the Elections Amendment Act did not exist when the explanation was initially sought on the brief majority decision of July 12. But now, parliament has enacted a new law, therefore the commission must be told whether to implement the law enacted by parliament or the decision of the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court had rejected the election commission's previous request for a clarification. Meanwhile, the issue of implementation of the Supreme Court's decision to allocate reserved seats to the PTI has once again hit a snag.

The election commission has held numerous unfruitful meetings in the last few days on the situation arising after the amendments to the Elections Act by parliament. It further notes that the Supreme Court's majority decision ruled that if there was any ambiguity, the election commission or the PTI could apply for clarification.

The election commission had filed an application earlier also in light of the brief verdict based on which, on September 14, eight judges of the Supreme Court issued an explanation and ordered full implementation of the court's decision on reserved seats.

Reserved seats: ECP files review against Supreme Court's Sept 14 explanation

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has filed a review petition challenging the Supreme Court's September 14 explanation regarding reserved seats, citing new parliamentary legislation and concerns over court-issued notices to PTI.

www.samaa.tv

 

[The Bald Eagle]

After removal from bench formation committee, Justice Akhtar skips defection law verdict review

Amid reports of rifts among the top judiciary, Justice Munib Akhtar on Monday skipped a hearing on a petition seeking a review of the 2022 verdict on the defection clause under Article 63A of the Constitution.

The review plea, filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), was set to be taken up by a five-member larger bench at 11:30am today.

Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, the bench was supposed to comprise Justices Akhtar, Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel.

Justice Akhtar’s decision comes against the backdrop of his removal from the three-judge committee established under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 after the promulgation of an amendment ordinance granting the CJP authority to select any judge as the committee’s third member.

In a letter, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, a member of the three-judge committee, had announced boycotting the panel over “unfettered and arbitrary discretion” vested in CJP’s role, while protesting Justice Akhtar’s removal.

In response to Justice Shah, CJP Isa listed several reasons for Justice Akhtar’s removal from the committee, including his alleged indifference to a piling backlog of cases.

Today, all judges except Justice Akhtar appeared in the courtroom.

It then transpired that the judge had written a letter to the SC registrar, which the chief justice read out parts of during the hearing.

CJP Isa said he would attempt to convince Justice Akhtar to remain part of the bench and adjourned the hearing till 11:30am tomorrow.

The hearing
At the outset of the hearing, CJP Isa noted that the May 17, 2022 verdict had been pronounced by a five-member bench.

Reading out his fellow judge’s letter, CJP Isa quoted Justice Akhtar as saying that he “could not be part of the bench formed by the committee”.

However, at the same time, Justice Akhtar, according to the CJP, clarified that he was “not recusing from being a part of the bench” and that it should not be misconstrued as that.

The chief justice further quoted the judge as requesting for his letter to be made a part of the record for the review case. “There is no custom to make such a letter part of the court records. Justice Munib’s letter cannot be made a part of the court file,” the top judge observed.

Justice Isa remarked, “It would have been better if Justice Munib Akhtar had voiced his opinion before the committee. I have always encouraged differing views.”

Noting that the review petition had been pending for more than two years, the chief justice termed the case of Article 63-A as “very important”.

“Justice Munib Akhtar’s opinion is respected,” the CJP said, highlighting that once a bench had been formed, a judge could recuse from the case only when in the courtroom.

After reading out the letter, CJP Isa said, ’We will request Justice Munib right now that he sits among the bench [judges].

“The law requires that the review appeal should be heard by the original bench. I fulfilled the place of the former chief justice and Justice Aminuddin was included to substitute Justice Ijazul Ahsan.”

The chief justice said he would ask the judge to be a part of the bench as the review petition ought to be heard by a five-member bench as per the original case.

At one point, PTI’s Barrister Ali Zafar came to the rostrum and expressed his reservations on the bench-forming committee. “The committee can only form benches when all three members are present,” he said.

The top judge noted that Justice Akhtar had taken up other cases today and was also present in the TV Room. “Him not being a part of the hearing was his choice.”

Expressing hope that Justice Akhtar would be convinced to hear the case, Justice Isa said the hearing was being adjourned till tomorrow.

In case Justice Akhtar did not agree to hear the case, the bench would be reconstituted, the top judge said. He further announced that the hearing would resume tomorrow whether or not the judge agreed to remain part of the bench.

During the hearing, the additional attorney general also requested that the bench take up the case on Tuesday.

Source: Dawn News