Islamabad:
The Pakistan Electoral Commission (ECP) has submitted its written statement to the Constitutional Bank (CB) of the Review Review requests of the Supreme Court in the case of the reserved seats, stating that the PTI was never part of the case before the SC.
On January 13, 2024, a three -member SC Bank confirmed the order of December 22, 2023 of the ECP that declared the surveys within the feast of the Null PTI and without effect. As a consequence of the SC verdict and its “misinterpretation” of the ECP, PTI candidates had to dispute the general elections of February 8, 2024 as independents.
Eighty independent candidates arrived at the National Assembly and then joined the Sunita Ittehad (sic) council in an apparent attempt to claim seats reserved for women and minorities. However, the ECP refused to assign the seats to the party, a decision that the SIC challenged in the Supreme Court.
On July 12, 2024, a complete bank of the Apex court, through the majority of 8 to 5, resurrected the PTI as a parliamentary part, and pointed out that 39 of the legislators who had submitted certificates of their affiliation with the PTI along with their nomination documents were already PTI legislators.
The SC ruled that the remaining 41 legislators who had not submitted the affiliation certificates at the time of the presentation of the nomination document could now do so within a period of 15 days. The government then presented requests for review against the ruling, and now a CB is listening to the case.
In his response, the ECP said that most of the judges who supported the order of July 12 did not take note of the clarifications issued on September 14 and October 18.
“Before these clarifications, the case never appeared before the full bank of 13 members. The majority decision violated article 10-A and article 4 of the Constitution.”
The ECP stated that the majority sentence incorrectly mentioned that the PTI was present before the court. He argued that PTI never requested the reserved seats, nor sought them in any forum.
He said that through the decision of July 12, the SIC was replaced instead of PTI. He said that the list of reserved seats is presented before probe according to the election calendar. However, the PTI was ordered to present the list for reserved seats after the elections, which is contrary to the law.
In addition, he said that 39 members were declared as members of PTI contrary to the legal procedure. The relief under article 187 was granted beyond the scope of the court jurisdiction, and the ECP was not heard when section 94 of the Electoral Law was invalidated.
Meanwhile, the PPP has also submitted additional statements to the Supreme Court, claiming that the decision of the court on July 12 was beyond the request and the requested relief.
The real problem was simply if the sic was entitled to reserved seats. The issue of granting PTI seats was never considered. This same question, if SIC had the right to reserved seats, was raised before the ECP, the Superior Court of Peshawar and the SC, he said.
The party said the SC issued a decision on reserved seats that were not related to real requests before. The court exceeded its jurisdiction and granted relief that had never been requested. The PTI and the sic are two different political parties, he added.
