During the hearing of the Sunni Ittehad Council’s appeal regarding reserved seats in the Supreme Court, Justice Athar Minallah remarked that the Election Commission misinterpreted the Supreme Court’s decision, excluding an essential party from the election. He emphasized that the bench, which decided on the electoral symbol, now clarifies that the interpretation must be corrected.
Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, leading a 13-member full court, heard the appeal. At the start, the Election Commission’s lawyer, Sikandar Bashir, began his arguments. The Chief Justice noted that the requested PTI reserved seats list was not provided. The lawyer responded that all records and the final case paper book were submitted, including the nomination papers of 81 independent candidates and PTI’s Form 66.
Sikandar Bashir explained that Hamid Raza’s nomination papers stated his affiliation with Sunni Ittehad and PTI Nazriati, a different political entity. Despite this, he was granted the Tower symbol as an independent candidate.
Justice Jamal Mandokhail noted that the Urdu documents did not indicate Hamid Raza’s intent to run as an independent. Bashir countered, saying Hamid Raza identified himself as an independent and did not submit a PTI Nazriati ticket. Justice Muneeb Akhtar questioned why Hamid Raza was given the Tower symbol if he was affiliated with another political party. The lawyer clarified that the Election Commission acted on Hamid Raza’s final request.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah asked for the records to be presented, highlighting the need for concrete evidence rather than assumptions. Justice Mandokhail asked if candidates could change their party affiliation after withdrawing nomination papers. Bashir explained that the Election Commission is considering the final request.
Chief Justice Questions EC’s Authority
Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa questioned if the Election Commission could exclude someone from the elections. Bashir responded that the returning officers decided to mark such candidates as independents to avoid complications.
Justice Athar Minallah expressed concern over the Election Commission’s interpretation. This led to the exclusion of a significant party, stating that the decision-making bench now confirms the misinterpretation. The Election Commission’s lawyer argued that these were mere observations and no final decision had been made.
The Chief Justice emphasized that public sentiment is paramount in elections, and candidates have the right to a party symbol if they demonstrate political affiliation. Justice Ayesha Malik questioned the Election Commission’s process of reading party manifestos to allocate reserved seats, suggesting a focus on more significant criteria.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar noted that the Election Commission’s actions are confused. Stressing that the Supreme Court intent was not to exclude PTI from the elections. Chief Justice Isa concluded the session by scheduling the next hearing for July 1, 11:30 AM. Instructing the provision of PTI’s reserved seats list and related declarations.
