The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) plans to contest the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) directive to establish six additional election tribunals to address poll disputes in Punjab, the electoral body’s chief announced on Tuesday.
Chief Election Commissioner Sikandar Sultan Raja made these comments on Thursday during a hearing of applications filed by three MNAs from Islamabad — all members of the ruling PML-N — seeking to transfer their cases out of the Islamabad tribunal.
Raja questioned the LHC’s decision to appoint six of its judges to election tribunals, stating, “Why does the law empower the ECP to appoint election tribunals? Is our role that of a mere post office?”
LHC’s Justice Shahid Karim, who issued the order, instructed the ECP to implement it within a week.
Raja questioned if the ECP’s role was merely administrative, while PML-N MNAs from Islamabad expressed distrust in the appellate body.
Islamabad MNAs’ Petitions
The CEC led a four-member panel that reviewed the appeals from Anjum Aqeel Khan, Tariq Fazal Chaudhary, and Raja Khurram Nawaz, who sought to move their cases to election tribunals outside Islamabad.
Khan’s lawyer, who won the election from NA-48, claimed that the tribunal’s first order to collect Forms 45 and 47 was issued in the candidate’s absence. He argued that the tribunal was notified of the winning candidates by the ECP, yet it proceeded with time-barred petitions and issued notices to all parties.
As per the law, election tribunals, composed of high court judges, are formed after the final results are announced, with losing candidates having 45 days to file petitions. The lawyer questioned the tribunal’s authority to issue notices to the ECP.
ECP member Ikramullah Khan also questioned the tribunal’s power to direct the body that created it. The lawyer contended that the tribunal cannot issue directives to the ECP.
The PML-N representatives’ lawyer claimed procedural violations by the tribunal, expressing a lack of confidence in its impartiality and fairness. He argued that petitions filed after the 45-day deadline should have been dismissed and sought a transfer to another tribunal or the creation of a new one.
The lawyer for Nawaz, also from NA-48, accused the tribunal of overstepping its mandate and violating trial procedures, urging for a transfer or new tribunal.
Tariq Fazal Chaudhry’s lawyer echoed these concerns, stating that the tribunal’s proceedings were illegal and biased, denying them a fair trial.
PTI-backed candidate Muhammad Ali Bukhari’s lawyer argued that the tribunal, consisting of a high court judge, was impartial, and the applicant’s claims were a delay tactic.
Sajeel Shehryar Swati, representing PTI-backed candidate Shoaib Shaheen, referenced a 2014 Supreme Court verdict that distinguished apparent partiality from actual bias and noted that the Elections Act requires tribunals to resolve election petitions within six months.
During the hearing, Shaheen requested an adjournment until Monday due to a challenge against the ECP’s decision to hear the case. The CEC stated that the hearing would be paused if a stay order was issued.
