The Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT) has issued a report detailing its assessment of the recently-concluded general election, expressing deep concerns over a decline in fairness scores compared to previous election cycles.
A nine-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and also comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Athar Minallah, will take up the case at 11am.
The suo motu notice was taken by the top judge after President Dr Arif Alvi earlier this week unilaterally announced April 9 as the election date in both provinces after his invitation for consultations on the matter was turned down by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).
In the previous hearing, the apex court had issued notices to all the stakeholders and asked them to come up with “skeleton arguments”.
Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Shehzad Ata Elahi, Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), government through the cabinet secretary, chief secretaries of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), all the advocate generals of the provinces, and the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) were also issued notices.
During the proceedings, a divide was also visible in the larger SC bench as Justice Mandokhail objected to the suo motu notice and termed it “not justified”, while Justice Shah and Justice Minallah raised queries regarding the motive behind the dissolutions of assemblies.
Suo motu notice
On Wednesday night, the top judge took suo motu notice of the delay in holding polls in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, saying that there appeared to be a “lack of clarity” on the matter.
In the notice, CJP Bandial said that the SC bench would consider the following questions:
Who has the constitutional responsibility and authority for appointing the date for the holding of a general election to a provincial assembly, upon its dissolution in the various situations envisaged by and under the Constitution?
How and when is this constitutional responsibility to be discharged?
What are the constitutional responsibilities and duties of the federation and the province with regard to the holding of the general election?
In his order, the CJP observed that there was, to put it shortly, a lack of clarity on a matter of high constitutional importance.
Comments
Post a Comment