Electoral qualifications, disqualifications must be clearly spelled out in law: SC

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court ruled that qualifications and disqualifications of a candidate for the electoral process must be clearly spelled out in the Constitution or the law.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and comprising Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Athar Minallah declared this in the case of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Tahir Sadiq disqualification case.

His nomination paper for the seat of a Member of the National Assembly from NA-49, Attock-I, was rejected by the returning officer on 30 December 2023, mainly on the ground that he was a “proclaimed offender”. In appeal, the Appellate Tribunal accepted his nomination paper. Thereafter, the respondent filed writ petitions before the Lahore High Court, which were decided against Tahir Sadiq.

The court said if the qualifications and disqualifications of a candidate for the electoral process are not spelled out, then electoral laws must be interpreted in favour of enfranchisement rather than disenfranchisement so that maximum choice remains with the voters to elect their future leadership. With this approach rooted in the high constitutional rights and values, the courts are to deal with the matters of acceptance or rejection of the nomination papers filed for contesting elections.

The judgment said that the right to form or be a member of a political party under Article 17(2) of our Constitution includes not only the right to contest elections but also the right to vote for the candidate of one’s choice. When viewed against the backdrop of the constitutional value of “political justice”, Article 17 (2) remains hollow unless it also recognises the right of citizens to choose their representatives fairly and freely from amongst the candidates.

The right of citizens to participate in national elections as voters is the core of the democratic form of government. This right is also an expression of the choice of the citizens, which finds further support under Article 19 of the Constitution. In exercise of these fundamental rights, citizens shape their destiny by forming the government they want.

It is in this context of both the right of the candidates to contest the election and the right of the voters to vote for the candidate of their choice that the qualification and disqualification of a candidate become material. The aim of prescribing qualifications and disqualifications for candidacies to contest elections is to maintain the integrity and effectiveness of the political process. They are designed to ensure that individuals holding public office meet certain standards. In a well-functioning democracy, the criteria for qualifications and disqualifications are clearly defined, publicly known and uniformly applied.

It said that the courts, in their role as guardians of democracy and fundamental rights, should approach electoral matters with circumspection, ensuring that their interventions uphold the democratic principles upon which the nation thrives and the fundamental rights of citizens to contest elections and vote for the candidates of their choice.

“The right to vote freely for the candidate of one’s choice is the essence of a democratic society, and any restrictions on that right strike at the heart of representative government.”

The working of democracy depends on whether the people can decide the fate of the elected form of government. It depends on the choices that people make in different ways. This choice of people cannot be compromised, as their mandate in elections changes the destinies of government. Through the electoral process and voting, citizens participate in democracy, said the court.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024