ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court suspended the Lahore High Court (LHC)’s order, which had stayed the notification of the Election Commission of Pakistan regarding appointment of District Returning Officers (DROs) and Returning Officers (RO) from the executive branch.
The ECP has been directed to announce the Election Programme for upcoming elections today (Friday). The counsel representing the Commission gave undertaking that the Election Programme will be issued today.
The Court also asked the Commission to resume the training of DROs and the ROs, which halted due to the LHC’s order.
Bureaucrats’ appointment as DROs, ROs: LHC suspends ECP notification
The LHC was directed not to make further proceeding on the PTI’s petition and send the file to the Supreme Court, and if the apex court deems necessary then it will fix it for hearing.
The chief justice said they would not do micromanagement, and has cleared the hurdle which has come in the ECP way in the shape of impugned order. He said the Court had not compelled anyone but the ECP and the President, themselves, have agreed to hold general elections on February 08, 2023.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in the late evening on Friday heard the ECP’s petition against the LHC’s order.
In the afternoon, the Chief Election Commissioner Sultan Sikandar Raja met with Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa in the Supreme Court building and apprised him about the LHC’s order. After that, Commission filed the petition before the SC challenging the LHC’s order. Later on, the PPP, PML-N, and other parties also filed the petitions in the Supreme Court.
A single-judge bench of the LHC comprising Justice Baqir Najafi on the petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) had suspended the ECP’s notification and recommended LHC chief justice to form a larger bench to hear the case comprehensively.
Following the LHC’s order, the ECP had stopped the ongoing training of DROs and ROs.
The SC bench issued contempt notice to Barrister Umair Niazi, who had filed the petition before the LHC praying to suspend the ECP’s notification, and expressed concern over the order passed by LHC judge Baqir Najafi at the eleventh hour and disregarding the judgment of the Supreme Court.
The order said that ordinarily, the Supreme Court does not pass the suspension order without issuing notices to the parties, but in view of the fact that the impugned order is directly in conflict with its order and the petition filed by the PTI lawyer does not appear to be maintainable.
The impugned order come in the way to the Election Commission’s constitutional responsibilities and functions as mandated under the constitution.
The ECP in its petition had sought the declaration that the LHC’s order is unconstitutional, void and under unlawful authority. Shajeel Sheryar Swati, representing the ECP had argued that two provisions of the Elections Act, 2017, subsist and the last two elections were held under them and no one till date has taken exception of them.
The Supreme Court on 03-11-2023 hearing number of petitions, which also included the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, had passed an order that election not be delayed.
The PTI had sought that a date for holding of general elections be announced. Pursuant to taking notice of the petitions the case was hearing and the President and ECP decided the elections date as 08-02-24.
The counsels of the federal, provincial and the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) also concurred. The lawyer ECP submitted before the Court that to ensure that the elections are held on 8th February 2024 number of days are required prior to the election date, but the passing of impugned order at eleventh hour would not permit the ECP to hold election of 08-02-24.
Swati said the ECP had drafted Election Programme under Section 57 of the Election Act, 2017, which it was intending to announce today (Friday), but due to the impugned it is not possible. He further said if the impugned order is sustained then it will also not be possible to hold training of the DROs and ROs.
Swati also informed the bench that under Sections 50(1) (c) and 51(1), the Commission had written to chief justice of all four provinces and the Islamabad High Court to provide judicial officer for upcoming election to act as DROs and ROs, but none of them agreed.
He then referred the letter of the LHC CJ that no judicial officer could be spared as 1.3 millions cases are pending in the lower judiciary, and providing such officers would result in increase of cases, which ultimately affect the litigants.
The Court noted that the impugned order is self-contradictory as in the first place it says that the file be placed before the chief justice LHC for constitution of a larger bench for hearing of the petition, but on the same time it suspended the ECP’s notification.
The Court further said that the judge by passing the order has gone beyond its jurisdiction under Article 199 of the constitution. It said when alternative remedy was available with the petitioner, then why it did not first obtain that.
The SC’s order said that the petitioner claimed to be a barrister; therefore, he should be well conversant with the constitution and law, but it seemed he did not understand the Supreme Court’s judgment that no one should be allowed to derail democracy on any pretext.
It is matter of great regret that the petitioner belongs to a political party and it was told to the apex court that he served as the Additional Advocate General Punjab during the regime of PTI.
In its petition in the high court, the PTI had contested the appointments of bureaucrats to act as DROs and ROs for the upcoming general elections and sought the appointment of officials from the lower judiciary for the poll exercise.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2023
Comments
Comments are closed.