Peshawar: After hearing the arguments on the petition filed against the rejection of Azam Swati’s nomination papers, the court reserved its decision.
The appeal filed by Azam Swati against the rejection of nomination papers was heard by Election Tribunal Judge Justice Shakeel Ahmed, who inquired on what basis his papers were rejected, on which Azam Swati’s lawyer Barrister Waqar Ahmed said that there are 3 objectors, 2 of them are not candidates in the election.
In his arguments, the lawyer said that one of the objections is that Azam Swati did not provide the details of the cases registered against him and he did not provide it even in the general elections in NA-15. According to the lawyer, after the general elections, Azam Swati filed petitions in the High Court, on which he was provided with the details of the cases, after which we have provided the details in the Senate election papers.
Azam Swati’s lawyer said that an objection has been raised against the technocrat seat saying that you are not eligible for it. They say you have no experience while the petitioner has been a member of the Senate for 18 years, 2 times as a technocrat and once on a general seat. Eligible for Technocrat from 2006 to 2012 and not eligible in 2024? The petitioner has also been a member of various committees in the Senate, and has also been a member of the Judges Committee.
Justice Shakeel Ahmed asked the counsel for the objector that 16 years of education and 20 years of experience are mandatory for a technocrat. He has been a member of the Senate and has also been a member of various committees, he has also participated in legislation, what do you say about that?
The counsel for the objector told the court that if they were members of the Senate, they must also have been members of the committees. Anyone who has become a member is also a member of the committees. When a person makes a false statement, he is disqualified. There were 2 cases registered against him, not even mentioning that he was on bail.
The court remarked that why a person makes a false statement, he wants to get some benefit. If he had said in the oath that there are no cases against me, then it would have been discussed. The objector’s lawyer told the court that even the cases he knew were not mentioned, this is a misrepresentation.
Later, the Election Tribunal reserved its decision after the arguments of the parties were completed.
(function(d, s, id){
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;}
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = “//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.3&appId=770767426360150”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = “//connect.facebook.net/en_GB/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.7”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));