- Advertisement -
ISLAMABAD, Jun 19 (APP):The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday adjourned the hearing of review petitions against its earlier verdict on reserved seats until Friday, June 20. The proceedings were conducted by an 11-member Constitutional Bench headed by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan.
Advocate Salman Akram Raja, representing petitioner Kanwal Shauzab, began his arguments by stating that he intended to clarify key points mentioned in the opinions of both the majority and minority judges from the previous ruling. However, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail observed that these arguments were not presented during the main hearing and that the court had itself extracted facts to reach its decision.
Justice Amin questioned whether Raja believed the Election Commission had acted unfairly against his clients? Raja replied that the injustice was not limited to the petitioners but extended to the public. Justice Amin responded that such arguments were irrelevant and urged him to exclude the Election Commission from the debate.
Raja argued that the Election Commissioner of Punjab had decided not to accept nomination papers filed under the PTI name, which led to 41 candidates being listed without party affiliation. Justice Mandokhail reminded the court that returning officers (ROs), not the Election Commission, are responsible for deciding nomination papers.
During the proceedings, Justice Mandokhail criticized a previous statement by Raja about children being arrested while carrying candies, noting that no parent appeared in court to substantiate such claims. Raja apologized for the remark, acknowledging it was misleading.
Justice Mandokhail remarked that during the original hearing, the court repeatedly inquired about PTI’s position, but Raja had come late and only argued in favor of granting seats to the Sunni Ittehad Council. “You did not just come late—you came incorrectly,” said Justice Mandokhail, adding that the court had provided full justice before the elections, but the facts now being presented were not raised at that time.
Referring to the Pir Sabir Shah case, Raja asserted that the Supreme Court has held that direct appeals can be filed against decisions by the Election Commission and that the court has broad jurisdiction to deliver complete justice.
Justice Amin, however, cautioned that the court must be aware of the boundaries of its jurisdiction, emphasizing that the case affects the democratic rights of the people. Still, he pointed out that the petitioners had failed to raise these arguments earlier.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar questioned whether the Constitution mandated that reserved seats must not remain vacant, to which Raja responded that the court had already declared that these seats cannot be left unfilled. Justice Mandokhail asked which fundamental rights had been violated, while Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan queried whether the court could fill a political vacuum on its own initiative.
Justice Afghan advised Raja to focus on the next elections. Justice Amin added that the court is bound by the Constitution and could revoke any unconstitutional decision, though Raja stated he did not consider the majority verdict unconstitutional.
The court later adjourned the hearing until 9:30 AM on Friday, June 20.