The decision of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) will be pronounced today on the petition of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) against the decision of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) related to the prohibited funding case.
In August 2022, the Election Commission issued a show-cause notice to the PTI after it concluded that the party received funding from prohibited sources. The notice was later challenged in the IHC.
A larger bench of Islamabad High Court comprising Chief Justice Aamir Farooq, Justice Mian Gul Hasan and Justice Babar Sattar reserved the verdict on January 11 after the arguments were completed.
During the hearing, the court had observed that the ECP’s responsibility was to do only what the Constitution allowed – which was limited to confiscation of funds.
While the ECP claimed during the hearing that he had no authority to change his decision, the court observed that if the PTI presented satisfactory evidence to the court – proving the legitimacy of the funds – The amount will not be forfeited.
During the hearing, PTI’s counsel argued that the ECP had termed it a “foreign-aided” party and invalidated PTI chief Imran Khan’s announcement.
“The financial affairs of political parties are looked after by chartered accountants,” he argued. ECP has targeted PTI.
The Chief Justice had said that the ECP did not give any declaration in its report, “The decision of the ECP is sometimes called an order, sometimes a report and sometimes just an opinion.” In my opinion, it was a fact-finding report,” he said.
However, the ECP representative insisted that it was not just a report but a decision.
He said that the ECP could not have issued a show cause notice without giving a decision.
During the hearing of the case, IHC Chief Justice Aamir Farooq said: “Are you afraid that Imran Khan will be disqualified on this issue? The ECP will not make any declaration in this show cause notice, nor criminal charges against Khan.” His authority extends only to the extent of confiscation of funds.
Moreover, the court had also criticized the ECP in the previous hearing for taking the matter to the federal government, as by doing so several cases were registered by the FIA against the PTI.
Now, if the court gives a verdict in favor of PTI, the notice will be withdrawn and the cases against the party will be withdrawn. It is also likely that the court will advise the electoral body to re-examine the matter.
PTI challenged Election Commission’s decision.
On August 10 last year, PTI had challenged the ECP’s decision in the prohibited funding case in the IHC seeking annulment of the order.
In his petition filed in the IHC, PTI Additional Secretary General Umar Ayub asked the court not only to set aside the August 2 verdict but also to quash the ECP’s show cause notices sent to PTI Chairman Imran Khan. Also cancel the notice.
The petitioner said he was “deeply saddened” by the fact-finding report – which revealed that the PTI received funds from foreign sources – and demanded that it be “perverse, wrong and without powers and jurisdiction”. Exceeded”.
In his plea, Ayub also asked the court to “declare that any action recommended by the ECP is beyond its jurisdiction and that no action can be taken on the basis of the fact-finding report”.
PTI also made ECP a party in the case.
Decision of Election Commission in Prohibited Funding Case
On 2 August 2022, the ECP announced in a unanimous decision that PTI had received prohibited funding. The case was earlier referred to as a “foreign funding” case, but later the Election Commission accepted PTI’s request to call it a “prohibited funding” case.
The commission found that donations were received from the United States, Australia, Canada and the United Arab Emirates.
The ECP verdict said that PTI received funds from 351 businesses including 34 individuals and companies.
Thirteen unaccounted accounts also came to light, the commission said in the judgment, concealing the accounts was a violation of Article 17 of the Constitution.
The funds were also in violation of Article 6 of the Political Parties Act.
Further, the ECP found that Khan submitted a false nomination form I and the affidavit provided regarding party accounts was also not authentic.
