Sharif brothers eligibility case: Supreme Court urged to take notice of delaying tactics

The Supreme Court on Monday was urged to take notice of delaying tactics adopted by defending counsel of Sharif brothers in their electoral eligibility case, saying 20 precious days of court were wasted discussing a single point.
Everyone is equal before the law, if it were not the case of Sharif brothers, the court had not allowed the counsel to argue for such a long time for establishing the law of standing, said Advocate Ahmed Raza Qasuri after hearing the arguments of Akram Sheikh on locus standi of proposer and seconder.
Advocate Akram Sheikh, counsel for Mehar Zafar Iqbal and Shakil Baig (proposer and seconder of Nawaz Sharif from NA-123) using his right of rebuttal for constitution of a larger bench presented instances from global jurisprudence to prove right of proposer and seconder to represent their candidate at court. A three-member bench of the apex court comprising Justice Moosa K Leghari, Justice Sakhi Hussain Bokhari and Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali, adjourned the hearing till Tuesday (today).
Akram Sheikh, the defending counsel confined his arguments to law of standing and locus standi of propser and seconder to represent the candidate at court. We are not here for a lecture on jurisprudence, objected Ahmed Raza Qasuri at the closing of court's business for the day.
Akram Sheikh said that since 1988 Pakistan has undergone a revolution in law of standing as with the expansion of law of standing a new era of fundamental rights has ushered in the country. He said that as laws are approved by the Parliament, similarly judges of the apex court were empowered to make new laws or reverse earlier judgement of the court.
He said that proposer and Seconder of Nawaz Sharif did not knock the doors of court; in fact they on behalf of the constituency were defending their candidate whose nomination was rejected by the Lahore High Court (LHC).
You have to draw a distinction between using litigation as a sword which is done by Noor Elahi and Khurram Shah and litigation as a shield to defend the right which was practised by Mehar Zafar Iqbal and Shakil Baig, he added. He said that the proposer and seconder were entitled to submit nomination paper of a candidate on behalf of their candidate. And every elector of a constituency had right to defend his candidate, he added.
He referred to Section 12(1) of Peoples' Representation Act to describe significance of proposer and seconder and said, earlier a candidate was represented and seconded by 50 people of the constituency. Later on, Ordinance 36, 2002 substituted 50 people by a proposer and seconder. He also referred to American Jurisprudence and said that a candidate was merely trustee of power, whereas all powers were bestowed to seconders.
Justice Moosa K Leghari observed that the stage of holding public office had yet to come (as Nawaz Sharif was not elected as a member of the Parliament yet). Replying to the observation, he said that he was merely defending the nomination of his candidate.
Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali observed that proposer and seconder were merely entitled to represent the candidate till submission of nomination papers. Once nomination papers are submitted, it is the candidate who decides whether to contest the election or withdraw and in case of any decision by the candidate the proposer and seconder have nothing to do.
Can a proposer and seconder withdraw the candidate from contesting the election and vice versa against the will of candidate, Justice Skeikh Hakim Ali asked the counsel. Akram Shiekh referred to resemblance of election laws with American Jurisprudence regarding demarcation of candidature into pre and post election stages and said that an elector being beneficiary had right to defend the trustee, and in case of trustee's absence the beneficiary can himself bring the claim. Akram Sheikh at the end of the day promised to conclude his arguments on next day. The court adjourned the hearing till Tuesday (today).