Hearing against bat sign: Request original records of intra-party elections from Election Commission

Islamabad: A direct hearing is going on in the Supreme Court on the application of the Election Commission against the decision of the Peshawar High Court regarding the bat symbol.

A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faiz Isa is conducting the hearing while the bench also includes Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Musrat Hilali.

Election Commission staff, PTI lawyer Hamid Khan, founding leader PTI Akbar S. Babar, Barrister Gohar, Advocate Shoaib Shaheen, Niazullah Niazi and Senator Waleed Iqbal are also present in the Supreme Court.

When the hearing started, Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar inquired that the detailed decision has not yet been issued? On which the PTI lawyer said that the detailed decision has not yet come and it seems that it will take a week to come. Vakil Election Commission said that on Saturday, January 13, election symbols are to be allotted to political parties.

Lawyer PTI said to complete the hearing on Monday. The Chief Justice said that we have heard on Saturday and Sunday as well, we are ready to work day and night to conduct the elections according to the law, we are ready to sacrifice till our vacation, to hear the case on Saturday tomorrow. If the hearing is adjourned till Monday, then it will be an academic proceeding and if the hearing is postponed till Monday, the decision of the Peshawar High Court will be suspended.

Vakil Election Commission argued that the PT intra-party election was not conducted according to the law. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that how a political party appoints a Federal Election Commissioner for elections, the Election Commission says that PTI’s Federal Election Commissioner has not been properly formed. There were and now Niazullah Niazi is Federal Election Commissioner, Federal Election Commissioner of PTI was not formed according to the law.

During the hearing, Tehreek-e-Insaf raised an objection on the admissibility of the Election Commission’s appeal. The PTI lawyer said that the Election Commission has filed the application, but it has to be seen whether it can do it or not. The Chief Justice remarked that the appeal of the Collectors also comes to the High Court and the Supreme Court, the question will also arise as to how the PTI went to the High Court.

The PTI lawyer said that there was a decision against us, so we approached the High Court. The Chief Justice remarked that if the Election Commission takes a decision and instead of defending it, casts it down, why should the Election Commission do this? If you gave the example of Sepert Bafi, the collector is also Sepert Bafi. A PTI lawyer gave an example of a Competition Commission case.

The Chief Justice said in his remarks that how this example can be applied to a constitutional institution, we as the Supreme Court cannot add or change the constitution, is there any rule in which there is a decision about an institution like the Election Commission, the decisions of the courts that you They are talking about subsidiary bodies, was the federal election appointed under the PTI constitution?

The lawyer PTI said that I am surprised, I have not noticed yet, to which the Chief Justice said that this case is still going on in the High Court, I am hearing it for the first time.

Vakil Election Commission argued that there were 14 complaints in the Election Commission against the PTI intra-party election. The Chief Justice inquired whether these 14 complaints were from PTI members or members of other political parties. Vakil Election Commission said that 14 complaints were submitted by PTI members.

Lawyer PTI Hamid Khan said in arguments that 14 complaints against the intra-party election were not related to PTI.

The Chief Justice remarked that if one does not like it, that is a different matter, but show the evidence that these 14 complainants were not members of PTI and were not sentimental.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said that if the founding member is expelled, show his paper. F Justice while talking to the lawyer PTI said that you should also present the list of founding members.

Akbar S. Babar’s lawyer argued that the document of removal of Akbar S. Babar from the party was not shown, on which Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that Akbar S. Babar is still a member of PTI. Lawyer Akbar S. Babar said that the Election Commission declared Akbar S. Babar as a member, no one challenged the decision of the Election Commission to recognize him as a member.

The Chief Justice remarked that sometimes candidates are elected unopposed in one or two positions in political parties, there is fierce competition in the election, in political parties there is fierce competition in intra-party elections, here 15 out of 15 people are elected unopposed. Gili, it is surprising.

PTI Election Commissioner stated in the court that 15 people from all over the country were elected unopposed in PTI intra-party election. .

The Chief Justice remarked that there used to be Justice (Rtd) Wajihauddin, to which the lawyer Election Commission said that he used to be much earlier.

The Supreme Court asked the Election Commission for the original records and put three questions before the lawyers of the Election Commission and PTI.

The Chief Justice of Pakistan remarked that in the PTI Constitution, the Federal Election Commissioner was entrusted with the responsibility of holding intra-party elections. Why was the word Chief Election Commissioner PTI written in the recent intra-party elections? In the intra-party election, other six provincial election commission members signed and if signed, where are their documents, if not signed, what are the reasons.

The court adjourned the hearing of the case till half past one.