PTI intra-party election; Sometimes someone becomes a ladle, Peshawar High Court

Peshawar: During the hearing on Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s intra-party election and election symbol case, Justice Ijaz Anwar has remarked that sometimes someone becomes a ladle.

The case was heard by a two-member bench comprising Justice Ejaz Anwar and Justice Syed Arshad Ali of the Peshawar High Court, in which the lawyers of the parties objecting to the intra-party election of the Tehreek-e-Insaf gave arguments. Earlier, the lawyers of PTI and Election Commission had completed their arguments last day.

During the hearing, Qazi Javed Advocate said in his arguments that my client was the former District General Secretary of PTI, who came to know from the media that the intra-party elections were taking place. He wanted to participate in the election but was not given the opportunity.

Justice Ijaz Anwar said that he did not say that the intra-party elections should be conducted again. If the Election Commission annulled the intra-party elections, then you should have called for re-elections. If you were from the party, then you should have objected to withdrawing the party symbol, but you did not, to which Qazi Jawad said that we were not given a chance in the elections and went to the Election Commission against it.

Qazi Javed Advocate said that the intra-party elections are for the whole country, the High Court can only look at the province, on which Justice Arshad Ali inquired whether they should have made separate cases in each province. If the intra-party election was held in Peshawar, how can you not file a case here? Justice Ejaz Anwar asked whether all the members were elected in the election that took place or only to the extent of the province?, to which Qazi Javed Advocate replied that the representatives of the entire country were elected.

Justice Ejaz Anwar said that an election has been held here and the Election Commission has declared it null and void. If the intra-party election has been held in Peshawar, why can’t it be challenged here, to which Qazi Jawad Advocate said that there are decisions of the courts regarding the jurisdiction, they had also gone to the Lahore High Court, but their application was dismissed. Justice Ejaz Anwar said that the Lahore High Court has written in the order that the case is under hearing in the Peshawar High Court and the Supreme Court, let the Peshawar High Court decide.

During the hearing, the lawyer-complainant said in his arguments that if PTI is talking about a level playing field, then it should give this field to its workers as well. The party workers did not know where the elections were. Then a bubble popped and an intra-party election took place.

Justice Ejaz Anwar remarked that then that bubble also burst. Do not talk about politics, come to the legal point. You are also saying that the intra-party elections were not done well, it is right to withdraw the marks from them. The lawyer said that why should I support a party which cannot hold intra-party elections according to the law? Election symbols keep changing, new symbols can be given for every election.

Later in the case, Naveed Akhtar, Jahangir’s lawyer of Charsadda, said in his arguments that my client had been the district president, on a statement Jahangir was dismissed from the party. Officials are not elected as required by the constitution. The updated list of officials should be given to the Election Commission. Electoral symbol is also given to a political party according to its credibility. Party constitution and voter protection must be taken into account.

When the hearing resumed after a break from the court, Justice Arshad Ali inquired whether there could be a penalty for intra-party elections, whether the Election Commission has taken this action, to which the lawyer said no, the Election Commission has issued 215 of the Election Act. Action taken under Justice Arshad Ali remarked that there is no question of intra-party elections in this section. The court said that if there is a violation of 209 then action can be taken under 208 and under 215. Section 209 says the results should be submitted to the commission within 7 days, they submitted the results within 7 days.

The counsel for the complainant argued that the Election Commission should have seen that the intra-party elections were held under Section 208. I have to discuss how the intra-party elections were held, to which Justice Ijaz Anwar said, “No, you are not talking about it.” Can’t, we haven’t heard them on that either. How the election was done will be discussed again on the evidence.

Barrister Ali Zafar while giving arguments on behalf of the lawyers of the parties regarding the questions on the jurisdiction, said that he wants to tell what is the principal on the jurisdiction. Article 199 empowers the High Court to hear. Our intra-party elections were held in Peshawar, which falls under the jurisdiction of the High Court. Our general secretary is also from this province. Justice Ijaz Anwar asked who is the General Secretary, to which Barrister Ali Zafar replied that Umar Ayub is the General Secretary, who belongs to the same province.

After PTI’s lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar completed his answer, the court asked the Election Commission’s lawyer, “Do you want to say something?” I was told that I have conducted the election, this is the chairman and this is the cabinet, just give me the election symbol. We were not allowed to scrutinize whether the organization was held according to their party constitution or not.

The election commission lawyer said that the chairman’s certificate should have said that Tehreek-e-Insaf has conducted the intra-party elections according to the constitution. Section 215 applies when the Election Commission has the power. Therefore, this application has to be rejected.

Justice Ijaz Anwar remarked that if the intra-party election was against the constitution, he neither showed nor punished him. He punished him by declaring his intra-party election null and void. On which the lawyer said that 208 says that the election has to be done within the time frame.