ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa on Tuesday said that all problems would be solved if Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) held internal polls.
The remarks came as the 13-judge bench conducted a hearing on a petition by the PTI-allied Sunni Ittehad Council against the denial of reserved seats (for women and minorities).
The PTI joined hands with the SIC ahead of the February 8 elections to contest the polls after the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) stripped the party of its election.
But it did not help the party as the Election Commission did not allocate the reserved seats to the SIC on the grounds that it had not submitted a list of candidates.
The party then approached the Peshawar High Court (PHC) in the matter, where the court upheld the election body’s decision.
In April, SIC chief Sahibzada Hamid Raza along with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly Speaker moved the SC to overturn the PHC verdict and allot 67 women and 11 minority seats in the assemblies.
On May 6, a three-judge SC bench headed by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, including Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Athar Minallah stayed the PHC verdict.
It then referred the case to the Judicial Commission to form a larger panel because the case required constitutional interpretation.
Today’s hearing
During today’s hearing, SIC counsel Faisal Siddiqui argued that although SIC as a party did not contest the elections, independent candidates were in fact contesting the polls.
The counsel further pointed out that though the SIC submitted its list of candidates, the ECP rejected it saying the party did not contest the polls.
CJP Isa pointed out that the SIC has performed as a parliamentary political party on two occasions and as a political party on one occasion.
In response, Advocate Siddiqui argued that a political party can actually be a parliamentary political party.
“The Constitution distinguishes between a parliamentary political party and a political party,” the chief noted.
“We were a political party before the February 8 election and we became a parliamentary political party after the [winning] independent candidates joined us,” the SIC lawyer replied, pointing out that the Constitution does not mention the words “parliamentary party” other than Article 63A.
Responding to the SIC lawyer’s argument that there would be no problem if the apex court explained its verdict on the bat symbol, the chief justice said that the issue of reserved seats would simply not have existed if the PTI had conducted its intra-party polls.
“If you want to talk about democracy, follow it to the letter,” remarked the chief justice.
Meanwhile, Justice Akhtar recalled that independent candidates had shown themselves to be affiliated with PTI and their nomination papers were duly accepted and even won the polls, noting that a candidate impersonating a party member would be considered a candidate. to be associated with her.
Only those who submit an affidavit that he is not affiliated with any political party will be considered as independent candidates, he said.
“How can the ECP Act declare PTI candidates independent,” Justice Akhtar observed.
Reacting to Justice Akhtar’s remarks that the dispute arose after a political party was stripped of its election symbol, the chief justice asked why the PTI had not challenged the court orders in this regard.
“Why didn’t you ask to bat as an independent candidate,” the CJP asked advocate Siddiqui.
“All independent candidates cannot ask to bat,” the lawyer replied, pointing out that Salman Akram Raja had even asked for the ECP to be declared PTI’s candidate. However, he added that Raj’s request was rejected.
“There is a different form for each constituency, why you can’t apply for it,” the judge emphasized.
He said the party should have declared its candidates independent and then looked for the bat symbol.
“You should have at least tried to secure the bat symbol. Then the SC would have seen whether it should be allotted to you or not,” the CJP said.
The court then adjourned the hearing to June 24.
