By ECP appeals against the ruling of the PHC: ECP’s appeal against the Peshawar High Court’s ruling allowing PTI to use the “bat” symbol is being heard by the Supreme Court.
A senior Supreme Court judge stated that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) should provide a level playing field within the party if it so desires. The judge further stated that the elections would have been the most transparent in Pakistan if the PTI had carried out its intra-party election in accordance with its constitution.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar made these comments as the Supreme Court began to hear the election commission’s appeal regarding the Peshawar High Court’s ruling permitting the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) to use the “bat” symbol. The case was considered by a three-person court chaired by Pakistan’s Chief Justice, Qazi Faez Isa.
The hearing on the PTI’s “bat” symbol proceedings was postponed by the Supreme Court on Friday till Saturday. CJP Isa had emphasized that nobody should meddle in the election commission’s operations because it is a constitutional institution.
Barrister Ali Zafar, a PTI attorney, informed the court at the beginning of the session that Saturday was the last day to turn in party tickets to the relevant returning officer. He continued on to say that neither the Elections Act of 2017 nor the Constitution permit any party to lose its electoral symbol or to examine elections held within their own party.
According to Ali Zafar, the ECP was unable to remove the electoral symbol due to allegations of irregularities. He further stated that every political party has the right to contest elections under a single symbol. He continued by saying that denying a party an electoral symbol is equivalent to denying their fundamental rights.
The electoral commission, the attorney said, was not a court of law, but it might be judicially examined if an incorrect decision had been made. He went on to accuse the election commission of discrimination.
Ali Zafar added, “The Election Commission of Pakistan did not hold a fair trial, nor did it take place. No PTI member challenged the intra-party election.”.
Read More: 9th May protests of PTI, the caretaker government nominates a committee
The attorney stated that the PTI is a private association of citizens and that the ECP possessed the suo motu authority to make decisions and consider appeals.
He highlighted that the intra-party elections were held in accordance with the party’s constitution and mentioned that the election commission had received 14 petitions objecting to the results. The petitioner was not a party member, according to the party’s perspective.
The ECP order that removed the party symbol, according to him, acknowledged that intra-party elections occurred but made no mention of any irregularities in its conclusion.
The CJP questioned whether there was democracy within the party or not. Election transparency is rarely recognized in Pakistan, he added.
The Pakistani Election Commission received 15 complaints, Judge Mazhar said, but it did not act on its own. He went on, “If you talk about level playing fields, then your party should practice them too.”
Additionally, he stated that the PTI’s constitution was being questioned because of the strict way it had been constructed. “If you had conducted the election according to your constitution, it would have been the most transparent election in Pakistan,” Justice Mazhar stated.
According to Ali Zafar, the PPP lost its election symbol—the sword—after which the PPP Parliamentarians were established.
The PML-N experienced a comparable period, CJP Isa said, but it was unclear who was in government at the time. He stated, “The PTI’s opponents are not in government today,” adding that although the term “establishment” was used, the army was actually the true name.
The CJP said, “We know from history how political parties have been affected,” and demanded that the counsel provide documentation demonstrating the intra-party poll’s authenticity.
CJP Isa said the PTI founder was currently in jail, adding that in such a situation, the importance of party elections increased.
“If, when he’s released, he says he doesn’t know who these people are,” the top judge stated. Justice Mazhar stated that the authority of the election commission was the primary issue and that without it, the other points would be become meaningless.
