The Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) petitioned the Peshawar High Court (PHC) to provide reserved seats for women and minorities, but the request was denied by a five-member bigger court on Thursday.
After listening to the parties’ three hours of arguments, the court deferred judgment on the petition.
The bench, which was presided over by Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim and comprised Justices Ijaz Anwar, Atiq Shah, Shakeel Ahmed, and Syed Arshad Ali, heard six petitions from the Election Commission of Pakistan as well as from other political parties.
Barrister Ali Zafar persisted in his arguments when the hearing began on Thursday, arguing that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) had been stripped of its emblem just days before the general elections.
After the Election Commission (ECP) decided to strip the PTI of its electoral emblem, candidates were granted alternative symbols to run as independents, a move that was supported by the Supreme Court. Nonetheless, a landslide of votes went to the PTI.
According to Barrister Zafar, they joined the SIC after becoming victorious in the election as independents.
The SIC was joined by 86 members-elect of the National Assembly, 107 from Punjab, 90 from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 9 from Sindh, and 1 from Balochistan legislatures.
He said that the ECP was required to provide the SIC 78 seats, but it did not.
The lawyer was asked by the court if it was considering the issue of all of the nation’s reserved seats. The appeal was for the National and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assemblies, Barrister Zafar retorted.
It should be mentioned that the SIC was denied three minority seats and twenty reserved seats for women by the ECP.
The ECP has said that it will decide this matter, according to Barrister Zafar. Six other applications were submitted in the meantime asking that the SIC not be given the allocated seats.
The SIC did not run in the general elections, the petitioners complained. As a result, before to the election, a list of candidates for reserved seats was not filed. Thus, the applicants requested that the seats that were reservedshould be distributed among other parties, he added.
The attorney argued that the Constitution stipulates that the number of seats that a party wins determines how many reserved seats it gets.
Barrister Zafar stated that he would want to present an argument about the query posed yesterday regarding the court’s authority over seats in the National Assembly.
Someone posed the inquiry, “What is a political party?” Barrister Zafar stated that the party that is named is a political party. Sections 202 and 210 of the Election Act go into great depth on what constitutes a political party.
if or if the SIC runs for office is irrelevant. He said that boycotts had a role in the election as well.
The court inquired as to whether a political party would continue to exist if it participated in elections or not. A political group takes part inThe lawyer said the Constitution provides that reserved seats should be given according to the number of seats won by a party.
Barrister Zafar said he would like to argue the question asked yesterday that whether this court has jurisdiction over the National Assembly seats.
A question was asked; what is a political party. Barrister Zafar said according to him, a political party is the one that is listed. Election Act’s sections 202 and 210 discuss in detail what is a political party.
It is insignificant whether the SIC contests election or not. Boycott is also a part of the election, he argued.
The court asked if a political party contest election or not, will it remain a political party. A political party participates in elections to win seats, it added.
Barrister Zafar said he would like to argue the question asked yesterday about whether this court has jurisdiction over the National Assembly seats.
A question was asked: What is a political party? Barrister Zafar said, according to him, a political party is the one that is listed. The Election Act’s sections 202 and 210 discuss in detail what a political party is.
It is insignificant whether the SIC contests the election or not. Boycott is also a part of the election, he argued.
The court asked whether a political party would contest an election or not and whether it would remain a political party. A political party participates in elections to win seats, it added.
According to Barrister Zafar, the SIC is authorized to run for office and has an electoral symbol.
Political parties have rights under Article 72, he said; they can form governments, take part in elections, and be granted reserved seats.
He was asked what would happen if a political party decided not to run for office by Justice Shakeel Ahmed. He asked, “What are my fundamental constitutional rights if I am a political party?”
According to Barrister Zafar, one is entitled to a number of basic rights under Article 17. The difference between a political party and a parliamentary party is not clear to the ECP.
The distribution of reserved seats among political parties is outlined in Article 51(3). According to him, political parties receive reserved seats based on the number of general seats they have won.
The court asked if an independent candidate may run on a ticket with allocated seats if that was his desire.
In response, the attorney said that independents must become members of a party. It is unconstitutional, he added, to deprive a party of its allocated seats for the sole reason of failing to submit a list.
It is not required to file a second time. According to him, a second schedule may be released, much as the ECP did when they released a revised election timetable.
