What's new

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

The Bald Eagle

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 25, 2023
Runs
17,484
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
 
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 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 government thinks Pakistan is a banana republic, PTI and Judiciary must stand against this non sense now
 

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
 
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
 
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.
 
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 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.
 

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
 
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.

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

 

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
 

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.

 
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
 
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.
 

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 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
 
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
 
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.

 
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
 

Supreme Court slams its own Article 63-A judgment​


The Supreme Court, criticising its earlier ruling on the interpretation of Article 63-A of the Constitution, had noted that the previous majority judgment paved the way to transform the leader of a political party into a dictator, simply because he or she could never be challenged.

"Another consequence of the majority’s judgment would be that once a Prime Minister and Chief Ministers are elected, they can never then be removed either by their own party or by the majority membership of the concerned assembly. Nothing can be more undemocratic; the majority’s judgment has opened the way to transform the leader of a political party into a dictator, simply because the party’s leader can never be challenged," read the 23-page detailed judgement authored by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa.

The court noted that the “majority judgment held that a member who votes contrary to the direction of the Parliamentary Party, the vote of such member is not to be counted/negated, not only the express provisions of Article 63A but also the following provisions of the Constitution: (a) Article 91(7), whereunder a Prime Minister may be called upon to obtain a vote of confidence from the National Assembly, (b) Article 95, under which a resolution is submitted seeking a vote of no-confidence, (c) Article 130(7), whereunder a Chief Minister is called upon to obtain a vote of confidence from the Provincial Assembly and (d) Article 136, which requires voting on a resolution of no-confidence against a Chief Minister.”

These constitutional provisions were rendered redundant.
"Substituting constitutional provisions with personal likes and moralisms must be avoided. What a particular judge considers to be right or wrong, or ethical or unethical, is neither the law nor the Constitution.

While lawmakers may transform moral precepts into law, however, the courts are concerned with what is lawful or unlawful. Parliament makes the law which the courts apply, and if there is any ambiguity in the law a judge interprets it, but this too must be done within the parameters of the law and as per the well-settled rules of interpretation."

The court has noted that instead of a constitutional or legal basis, the majority judgment has a surfeit of moralisms and non-legal terminology, such as healthy (41 times), unhealthy (5 times), vice (9 times), evil (8 times), cancer (8 times), menace (4 times), etc.

"The majority’s judgment also reflects a complete distaste for parliamentarians (in paragraph 106) as it proclaims that in the history of Pakistan and its Parliament only once did a parliamentarian come close to becoming a ‘conscientious objector who took the path of defection and deseating under Article 63A.’ The expression of such contempt for politicians and parliamentarians is regrettable. Let us not forget that Pakistan was achieved by politicians who had gathered under the banner of the All-India Muslim League and its Quaid (leader), MA Jinnah, who strictly followed the constitutional path."


 

ECP decisive meeting gets legal advice to implement Election Act on reserved seats​


The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) Chief Election Commissioner Sikandar Sultan Raja's important consultative meeting has culminated wherein ECP’s legal team gave a final recommendation to implement the Election Act, sources claimed.

SAMAA TV quoting sources reported that the ECP legal team suggested the reinstatement of suspended members on reserved seats because every department was duty-bound to implement Parliament-passed laws.

“The Supreme Court's order became ineffective after the amendment of the Election Act,” the legal team told the ECP.

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) will make the final decisions on the suggestions of the legal team, and sources.

 
What a stupid decision
====

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa has sought an explanation from Supreme Court staff following the release of a second clarification by eight judges in the reserved seats case without submitting the original case file

The CJP has directed Deputy Registrar Mujahid Mahmood, Assistant Registrar Shahid Habib, and Webmaster Asim Javed to explain how the clarification was published on the court’s website without following standard procedure.

"How was the clarification issued without submitting the original file?" Justice Isa questioned in a notice sent to the concerned staff members on Saturday.

According to sources within the Supreme Court, the Deputy Registrar and Assistant Registrar have been officially notified and asked to provide details regarding the procedural lapse. The court has also requested a response from Webmaster Asim Javed regarding the incident.

Yesterday, eight Supreme Court judges issued a second clarification concerning their decision on reserved seats, stating that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) must implement the court's ruling, despite amendments to the Elections Act, 2017.

The court had ruled in July that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was entitled to the seats reserved for women and minorities, a decision that was challenged after the government amended the election law. However, the bench reaffirmed that these changes cannot override the original ruling.

Source: The Express Tribune
 
What a stupid decision
====

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa has sought an explanation from Supreme Court staff following the release of a second clarification by eight judges in the reserved seats case without submitting the original case file

The CJP has directed Deputy Registrar Mujahid Mahmood, Assistant Registrar Shahid Habib, and Webmaster Asim Javed to explain how the clarification was published on the court’s website without following standard procedure.

"How was the clarification issued without submitting the original file?" Justice Isa questioned in a notice sent to the concerned staff members on Saturday.

According to sources within the Supreme Court, the Deputy Registrar and Assistant Registrar have been officially notified and asked to provide details regarding the procedural lapse. The court has also requested a response from Webmaster Asim Javed regarding the incident.

Yesterday, eight Supreme Court judges issued a second clarification concerning their decision on reserved seats, stating that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) must implement the court's ruling, despite amendments to the Elections Act, 2017.

The court had ruled in July that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was entitled to the seats reserved for women and minorities, a decision that was challenged after the government amended the election law. However, the bench reaffirmed that these changes cannot override the original ruling.

Source: The Express Tribune
The pathetic crook has done every thing to get his extension. A disgusting man that destroyed a very fragile democracy.
 

'No action on reserved seats verdict until Election Commission acts:' Ayaz Sadiq​


National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq has stated that no action regarding reserved seats can be taken until the Election Commission issues a formal notification. Ayaz Sadiq stated that he will not comply with the Supreme Court's order regarding the reserved seats case

Speaking to a private TV channel, Sadiq expressed concerns about members who have recently joined the Sunni Ittehad Council, questioning how they can retroactively affiliate with another party.

He further highlighted that changes have been made to election laws, prompting him to ask whether the Parliament does not possess the same authority as the Supreme Court to amend the constitution.

The issue arises amid ongoing discussions about party loyalty and the implications of recent shifts among members within the National Assembly.

“It is the Election Commission’s job to notify members,” he said. “If we start listening to courts, there are many decisions … We won’t do it on the court’s order; we will wait for the ECP to notify it,” he added.

Sadiq clarified that he would acknowledge court orders but would not act on them without an ECP notification.

In July, the Supreme Court declared the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) eligible to receive reserved seats for women and non-Muslims in national and provincial assemblies, which bolstered the party's position in the legislature.

“The court told them (the PTI) that they could affiliate with a party after 15 days, so the PTI members went ahead and joined the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) … so floor crossing was allowed,” Sadiq noted.

He remarked that had the PTI candidates not joined the SIC, the outcome would have been entirely different. “Instead, the court gave them 15 days, rewriting the Constitution,” he stated.

Sadiq added that since the Constitution has been amended, the Supreme Court has diminished authority to make rulings on such matters. “If the court said that we cannot take a decision because it’s backdated, we can respond that their decision was also backdated,” he claimed.

When asked if he favours the ECP over the apex court, Sadiq affirmed that he prefers waiting for the ECP’s directives on parliamentary issues, despite being informed of court decisions.

“Once we receive a notification from the ECP, we apply our minds and take a decision.”

Sadiq expressed that the Supreme Court cannot challenge the recently passed 26th constitutional amendment, stating that doing so would contravene the Constitution.

Earlier in the week, a request was made to the Supreme Court to strike down the 26th Amendment, with petitioners seeking an inquiry by a judicial commission to determine if the two-thirds majority was achieved voluntarily or through unlawful inducement.

Sadiq condemned this move, reiterating that while the court interprets the Constitution, it cannot rewrite it. “It is baked into the rules,” he stated. “The court cannot challenge constitutional amendments, as that would violate the Constitution. However, the calls to challenge the amendment are growing quieter.”

 
The PTI submitted a contempt petition in the Supreme Court on Monday against the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for not implementing the top court’s July 12 order in the reserved seats case

On July 12, a 13-judge full bench of the apex court had declared that the opposition PTI was eligible to receive reserved seats for women and non-Muslims in the national and provincial assemblies, dealing a major setback to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s ruling coalition and potentially making the PTI the single largest party in both houses of Parliament.

The Supreme Court had also declared the PTI a parliamentary party. The majority judgement explained that 39 out of the 80 MNAs, shown by the ECP as PTI candidates, belonged to the party. The rest of the 41 independents would have to file duly signed and notarised statements before the commission within 15 days, explaining that they contested the February 8 general elections as a candidate of a particular political party.

Through many developments and admonitions by the apex court, the ECP has still not yet implemented the verdict.

A petition submitted by PTI Secretary General Salman Akram Raja today mentioned the chief election commissioner and provincial election commissioners as the respondents.

He argued that the court’s judgement and further two clarifications on its verdict “leave no doubt whatsoever” that the PTI was entitled to reserved seats.

Despite that, Raja said the ECP had yet to act upon the judgement and complete the process of electing lawmakers on reserved seats.

“This deliberate and contumacious failure to act in accordance with the judgment … renders the chief election commissioner as well as the four members of the ECP liable to proceedings for the contempt of the judgment of this honourable court,” he argued.

The PTI secretary general requested that contempt of court proceedings be initiated against the ECP and it be directed to comply with the July 12 verdict.

Source: Dawn News
 
Do I care?
Obviously you do because you made some crap up about 9th May to justify the murder and mayhem unleashed on PKs. And when are you going to reply to my question on the CCTV. Does it take 1.5 years to find the CCTV?🤣🤣🤣
 
Obviously you do because you made some crap up about 9th May to justify the murder and mayhem unleashed on PKs. And when are you going to reply to my question on the CCTV. Does it take 1.5 years to find the CCTV?🤣🤣🤣
What are you on about?

What is this thread?
 

KP govt to file writ petition against ECP for not allocating reserved seats​


Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Information Adviser Barrister Saif said on Friday that the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government would file a writ petition against the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

In a statement, the Information adviser said the government had decided to bring a writ petition against the ECP for not allocating reserved seats to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

“The ECP hasn’t issued notification of reserved seats despite the Supreme Court’s (SC) majority verdict. It also hasn’t issued schedule for election of KP’s Senate seats. The approval of the writ petition was given during the last provincial cabinet meeting presided over by KP Chief Minister Ali Amin Khan Gandapur,” he added.

He informed the media that the KP advocate general would file the petition while accusing the ECP of using dilatory tactics as well as violating the SC’s order.

“The prejudice of the ECP against the PTI has given us huge loss. The ECP has committed contempt of court and violation of the Article 6,” he concluded.

 
Back
Top