Pakistan
CJP seeks explanation from registrar on reserved seats verdict
CJP put nine questions regarding apex court’s September 14 majority decision
Islamabad: Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa has asked nine questions from the Supreme Court registrar regarding a decision on reserved seats.
In a letter written to SC registrar Jazeela Aslam, CJP put nine questions regarding apex court’s September 14 majority decision on reserved seats.
The CJP asked registrar Ms Jazeela when did the Election Commission (ECP) and Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) file civil miscellaneous request for clarification?
Why the applications were not sent to the Practice and Procedure Committee?
How were the miscellaneous petitions fixed for hearing without issuing a cause list?
Why has the cause list not been issued for hearing the applications?
Did the Registrar's Office issue a notice to the parties concerned and the Attorney General? In which courtroom or chamber were the applications heard?
The Chief Justice asked why the order was not fixed in a court room for pronouncing.
How was the order uploaded [on website] without the original file and the order being deposited in the Supreme Court Registrar Office?
Who gave the order to upload the order on the Supreme Court websites?
The Supreme Court had issued a written order on the ECP's plea for clearing ambiguity on the majority decision on reserved seats.
The apex court, in its judgement, declared that the ECP had recognised that PTI was a registered political party. It is mala fide on part of the ECP not to acknowledge the certificates of the PTI members. For its act [of defiance] the ECP may face constitutional and legal consequences.
The apex court’s decision categorically declared that all those who submitted certificates would be considered members of the PTI. The decision would be applicable to the national and provincial assemblies.
The Supreme Court strongly rejects ECP’s attempt to create confusion, declared the decision.
The written order mentioned that the ECP had recognised the PTI as a registered political party and Barrister Gohar as its chairman. Now the commission cannot change its position in the name of clarification.
Earlier, on September 14, an eight-member bench of the apex court disposed of the ECP's petition, stating that the request for clarification was merely a "delaying tactic".
"Putting together the record placed before us, and considering the same in light of the short order, leaves in little doubt that the clarification sought by the commission is nothing more than a contrived device and adoption of dilatory tactics," the bench stated in a clarification.
The deputy registrar submitted a note to the registrar of the apex court concerning the "clarification issued by eight judges" on a miscellaneous request from the ECP.
The deputy registrar noted that there had been media reports suggesting that the Supreme Court had issued a clarification regarding its decision made on July 12. But it was highlighted that "no notices have been issued to the parties concerned by the registrar's office, nor have any notices been sent in response to the Election Commission of Pakistan's request for clarification."