ISLAMABAD - A day after seeking guidance from the Supreme Court on the controversial reserved seats issue, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) yesterday filed a review petition challenging the apex court’s explanation issued on September 14.
The commission, in its petition, states that the electoral watchdog was not responsible for delay in the court’s decisions.
It states that the top court issued an order on the clarification request on September 14. In the review petition, it was mentioned that neither the election commission was issued a notice on the PTI document nor was a reply sought.
It may be noted here that the apex court in its judgment on September 23 issued termed the PTI “a political party” and eligible for the seats reserved for women and minorities.
The commission, on Thursday last had approached the top court seeking its guidance whether to follow the amended Election Act 2017 or its judgment on the matter of allocating reserved seats to the PTI.
The top election body also mentioned National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq’s letter stating that the amendments were made to the Election Act after the top court’s verdict declaring the opposition party eligible for the reserved seats. As the Speaker National Assembly had told the election body in his letter that the apex court’s July 12 ruling was “incapable of implementation” after the amendments to the Election Act 2017.
The ECP contended that this court in its short order had allowed 41 candidates to join any political party on the condition that such candidates provide a confirmation to the effect that the candidate contested the general election as such party’s candidate and a corresponding confirmation be filed by the political party. However, it is respectfully submitted, in the detailed reasoning, this Court has limited such confirmation to single political party i.e. PTI. This direction is a complete deviation from what was earlier decided by virtue of the short order dated 12.07.2024. That said direction being contradictory cannot fall within the ambit of an explanation or an amplification of the short order.
It stated that the apex court has accepted that the SIC is not entitled to the reserved seats for women and non-Muslims, never complied with the requirements of law.
It further said that PTI even if recognized as a political party, failed to comply with the provisions of law in as much as the party certificates were never issued by duly elected and recognized party head. Such was the mandatory requirement of law as contained in the Elections Act, 2017 compliance with which is the duty of every political party.
The petition said that Article 51 further requires an independent candidate to join a contesting political party having won general seats within three days of the publication of his name in the official gazette, if his seat is to be considered towards the strength of that political party for the purposes of allocation of reserved seats. Compliance with such requirements and the definitive deadline is mandatory. The order of this Court has not only reset the clock but expanded the time to 15 days by substituting words of the Constitution, something which is clearly not permissible under the well-established jurisprudence of this court.
In a significant development, the electoral body also filed two other petitions for review concerning the ‘clarification order’ and seeking stay with regard to the July 12 order’s implementation till the pleas were decided.
The commission, in its petition, sought the court’s guidance with respect to the effect of the Elections (Second) Amendment Act, 2024 on the short order of the apex court of July 12 clarification order dated September 14 and the detailed judgment dated September 23 in the interest of justice.
As per its petition, the commission noted the apex court’s reserved seats verdict was based on assumptions.
The ECP also mentioned that the Constitution binds independent lawmakers to join any political party within three days of their notification.