The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Federation to defend its role in filing petition in Sharif brothers' electoral eligibility cases to substantiate that it was aggrieved by Lahore High Court (LHC) decision, disqualifying Nawaz Sharif from contesting the by-elections and referring candidature of Shahbaz Sharif to an election tribunal.
Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Agha Tariq Mehmood, representing the Federation apprised the court that the Federation had filed the petition because it was made a party in the LHC, adding: " The Federation has to cater every one." A three-member bench, comprising Justice Moosa K Leghari, Justice Sakhi Hassan Bukhari and Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali, heard Sharif brothers' eligibility case and adjourned the hearing till January 14.
Ealier, former DAG Raja Abdul Rehman, filing the petition against the LHC decision on behalf of the Federation, had said that Federation was aggrieved as the LHC decision was in violation to Article 199 and 225 of the Constitution, adding high courts were not competent to hear election disputes as election tribunal was the forum for such matters.
Agha Tariq gave a brief history of the case, and said that nomination papers of Nawaz Sharif were accepted, but Noor Elahi, a contesting candidate, had filed objection against that. Noor Elahi contented that Nawaz Sharif was convicted, was propagating against the judiciary, therefore, he could not contest the elections.
Justice Leghari observed that he was not an aggrieved party and enquired from the DAG whether any documents about pardon or against conviction regarding Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif had been submitted to the Returning Officer. He said that there was no evidence available about the charges against Sharifs levelled by the petitioners as pleas against Sharif brothers were based on press clippings to the effect that they had propagated against the judiciary.
The DAG said an oral reply was given to the RO regarding pardon of Nawaz Sharif, adding no documentary proofs were submitted there. He further said that he was the representative of the Federation and he had been directed to provide legal assistance to the court on eligibility matters.
Counsel for one of the respondents A. K. Dogar said that the case was of great importance and many new points had emerged during the proceedings and he wished to address all those issues in his arguments before the court. "I have confidence in the court," he said. "We try our level best but treat us as human beings," Justice Musa K. Laghari observed. The court after hearing the arguments of the DAG adjourned the hearing till January 14.