Connect with us

Pakistan

Islamabad High Court dispose of petition filed against appointment of Senate chairman

Islamabad: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has dismissed the petition filed against the appointment of Chairman Senate as inadmissible for hearing.

Published

on

Islamabad High Court dispose of petition filed against appointment of Senate chairman
Islamabad High Court dispose of petition filed against appointment of Senate chairman

According to GNN, Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Athar Minallah while dismissing the petition stated, "Under the article of the constitution, the petition is not admissible. The matter should be taken up with the committee in this regard,"

In the petition, Gillani had stated that seven votes cast in his favour were rejected by the RO during the election for the Senate chairman. The petition reads that the RO’s order to declare the votes illegal should be overturned.

Representing PDM candidate in court, Farooq H Naik said that the Election Commission has no role in the election of the Senate Chairman. If there is any irregularity in the procedure, it cannot be challenged in court. The rules have nothing to do with ballot papers or votes, the rules are silent on this.

On the other hand, The Chief Justice asked how the right to internal proceedings of Parliament would be derived from Article 69 of the Constitution.  Further questioning, he asked, Can the internal proceedings of Parliament be challenged in court? If Yousuf Gilani has a majority, he can remove Sadiq Sanjarani. Parliament is there to solve problems. Should the court intervene in parliamentary matters?

Earlier, IHC reserved verdict on admissibility of petition filed by former Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani challenging the election of Senate chairman.

According to details, the hearing was conducted by IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah. After a preliminary hearing, the court reserved its judgment which is likely to be announced shortly.

During court proceedings, Chief Justice Athar Minallah suggested that the petitioner could send a reference to the National Assembly speaker under Article 63 to have his grievance redressed.

The court further remarked that it abstains from unnecessarily intervening in the matter. “You can take the matter to a Senate committee,” the judge suggested the petitioner’s counsel Farooq H Naek.

On March 22, Yousaf Raza Gillani filed a petition in the Islamabad High Court (IHC) challenging the rejection of seven votes in Senate chairman elections.

The Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Senator Gillani moved the petition through his counsel Farooq H Naek appealing court to declare the results of the elections of March 12 as “illegal, unlawful and void”.

It was requested in the petition to suspend the notification dated March 13 regarding the re-election of Sadiq Sanjrani as Senate chairman.

Gillani further stated in his petition that the government of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) attempted to influence senate elections in order to win it.

“During the process of counting of votes the Presiding Officer (Syed Muzaffar Hussain Shah) arbitrarily rejected 7 of the votes (the rejected votes) cast in the petitioner’s favour on the ground that stamp is affixed on the name of the petitioner despite protest of the petitioner’s polling agent Senator Farooq H. Naek that the stamp had been fixed within the box containing the name of the petitioner,” it was written in the petition.

It is pertinent here to mention that the members of the Upper House of the Parliament elected government’s candidates Sadiq Sanjrani and Mirza Muhammad Afridi for top senate slots, while Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) candidates Yousuf Raza Gilani and Maulana Abdul Ghafoor Haideri faced defeat.

A total of 98 members of senate voted for Chairman and Deputy Chairman. Sadiq Sanjrani got 48 votes while his opponent Yousuf Raza Gilani got 42 votes and 7 votes were rejected.

Likewise, ex-FATA Senator Mirza Afridi secured 54 votes, defeating PDM candidate Abdul Ghafoor Haideri who got only 44 votes.

The opposition claimed that the intention of voters was clear in seven votes that were rejected by the presiding officer and announced to challenge the election in a court of law.

Trending