On Thursday, a two-member bench of the Supreme Court referred a petition concerning election tribunals to the Practice and Procedure Committee for the formation of a larger bench. The court also requested records of correspondence between the four high courts and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).
The bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, commenced hearing on the ECP’s appeal against the Lahore High Court’s decision regarding eight election tribunals in Punjab. The LHC had ruled on May 29 that the chief justice holds primacy in appointing election tribunals under Sections 219(C) and 222(B) of the Constitution and Section 140 of the Elections Act, 2017.
During the proceedings, ECP lawyer Sikandar Bashir Mohmand urged the bench to constitute a larger bench, asserting that the LHC’s decision contradicted constitutional provisions empowering the ECP to establish tribunals independently.
Salman Akram Raja, representing one of the petitioners from the LHC, argued that intra-court appeals should have been pursued before approaching the Supreme Court. He also supported Mohmand’s request to refer the matter to the Practice and Procedure Committee.
Mohmand elaborated on the historical context of tribunal formation since 1977, highlighting the ECP’s role and its communications with high courts following the recent general elections. He noted that while Punjab had some issues, other provinces did not dispute tribunal formation.
Chief Justice Isa emphasized the importance of consultation between the ECP and the LHC chief justice to resolve disputes amicably. He criticized unnecessary controversies, suggesting that direct communication could have preempted legal disputes.
Justice Afghan, drawing from his experience as Balochistan High Court chief justice, affirmed that tribunal establishment fell under the ECP’s authority. He also underscored the significance of upholding constitutional provisions and legal principles.
The bench, while discussing the presidential ordinance concerning retired judges’ appointment as tribunal heads, expressed concern over its timing and parliamentary oversight. Chief Justice Isa criticized the ordinance as an electoral interference, questioning its necessity and legality post-parliamentary enactment.
The court directed to obtain comprehensive records of correspondence between the high courts and the ECP on tribunal establishment and referred the case to the Practice and Procedure Committee for further deliberation on forming a larger bench.
