ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Umar Atta Bandial on Tuesday remarked that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has no authority and legal support to postpone the elections in Punjab till October 8 and He hastily ordered March 22.
A five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsen, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Aminuddin Khan and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, heard the petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) challenging the Election Commission. of Order dated March 22
During the hearing which lasted for more than three hours, Chief Justice Bandial remarked that ‘elections can be postponed only by declaring emergency. He also asked whether the ECP decision recommended imposition of emergency. The Chief Justice remarked that it is clear that the ECP does not have the power to change the date of elections in Punjab by the President. The Chief Justice remarked that in fact the ECP hastily passed its order on March 22, postponing the elections to October 8.
He said that the court will not delay the urgent matter, he raised a very simple question whether the ECP is competent to extend the date of election. The Chief Justice said that if the ECP has the power, the question will not arise and the matter will be over. The Chief Justice further said that maintaining the rule of law is essential for the functioning of democracy, adding that democracy cannot flourish without the rule of law.
Farooq H. Naik, representing the Pakistan People’s Party, however, emphasized that there is also trust in democracy, adding that petitions will decide the fate of political parties. “We are the representatives of the people and the stakeholders in the immediate matter,” Naik said, adding that there is anarchy and fascism at the moment.
The Chief Justice asked Naik that he himself told the court that 90 days are required to hold elections after dissolution of assemblies. “Rule of law and democracy are two sides of the same coin,” the chief justice said, adding that the court could not decide a legal dispute in a vacuum but would interpret the constitution on facts. The Chief Justice recalled that in his March 1 order, he had declared that the law empowers the President to announce the date of elections.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail asked Naik why the parliamentarians are not raising this matter on the floor of the parliament. The PPP lawyer replied that we are considering it.
PTI’s lawyer, Barrister Ali Zafar, while arguing in the court, questioned whether the ECP’s order on March 22 is a violation of the constitution. He said that the Supreme Court has issued various judgments related to Article 224 and 105 of the Constitution, adding that the most popular judgment of the Supreme Court was in the case of Khawaja Sharif in which it was said that within 90 days of the elections Internal elections should be held. Dissolution of Assemblies, so it was a fit case on the matter.
Similarly, he submitted that another case titled Mian Nawaz Sharif v. Federation, which was recorded by 12 judges of the Supreme Court, specifically talked about the right to participate in the affairs of government and legislation and That elections were related to basic fundamental rights. . He said that one of the judges of the said bench, Justice Saleem Akhtar, had said in his judgment that if the right to participate in election matters was denied, it would be the worst violation of fundamental rights.
Justice Ijazul Ahsen remarked that the ECP has the right to adjust the election schedule within 90 days, but added that it cannot exceed the 90-day limit. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail remarked that 90 days have passed, elections should be held in any case. Justice Mandokhail added that ‘but who will extend the date of elections beyond the 90 day limit and this is the important question’. The PTI counsel argued that democracy is established only through elections and the ECP was constitutionally mandated under Section 58 to ensure timely elections.
Similarly, he submitted that Article 218(3) of the Constitution states that the Election Commission shall have the duty to conduct elections honestly and fairly in accordance with the law and to guard against corruption. “Suppose we ask the Election Commission to ensure the election and they do not comply with our order, what can we do?” Justice Mandokhail questioned PTI’s counsel.
The lawyer replied that every institution is bound to fulfill its constitutional responsibility within its constitutional limits. He said that Article 220 obliges all executive authorities to provide support to the ECP in discharging its duties for conducting elections in the country.
Justice Ijazul Ahsen remarked that the Election Commission should have consulted the President before postponing the schedule of elections in Punjab. Barrister Ali Zafar said that the ECP took the decisions after taking opinions from various institutions. He alleged that the commission was limited to holding meetings but never asked for money or security personnel. Justice Munib Akhtar remarked that if there was no possibility of elections, the commission should have consulted the Supreme Court first, but it cannot take a decision on its own.
Justice Munib Akhtar remarked that if the commission can extend the date of election by six months, then it can also extend the date by two years. Justice Mandokhail said that ‘but the constitution is silent on the point that who can extend the date of elections’. Ali Zafar said that ‘but the basis on which the elections were postponed, it can never happen’.
Justice Munib Akhtar remarked that the federal government said it had collected taxes worth Rs 500 billion till February 2023, but it is strange that Rs 20 billion was not given to conduct elections in two provinces. The PTI lawyer said that release of funds is a technical issue. Chief Justice Bandial remarked that the country is going through an economic crisis and this is a fact that cannot be ignored. Sacrifice is necessary to deal with crisis. The Chief Justice said that the expenses of the election can be met by cutting the salaries by five percent. He added that elections are being held everywhere in Turkey except the earthquake-affected areas.
Meanwhile Akram Sheikh Advocate told the court that he will present arguments on behalf of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PMLN). Later, the court adjourned the hearing of the case till today (Wednesday).
