Reserved seats to PTI: Three PMLN MNAs move SC for review of its verdict

ISLAMABAD: After the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PMLN) president, three more party MNAs approached the Supreme Court to review its judgement delivered on July 12 in the Sunni Ittehad Council appeal seeking reserved seats for women and minorities in the National and provincial assemblies.

Huma Akhtar Chughtai, Mahjabeen Abbasi and Syeda Amna Batol filed review petitions in the apex court under Article 188 of the Constitution against its judgement declaring that Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) deserves the reserved seats. The petitioners made SIC chairman Sahibzada Hamid Raza, Election Commission of Pakistan, Muttahida Qaumi Movement, Pakistan People Party Parliamentarian (PPPP) and others as respondents.

They prayed the apex court that the operation of the July 12 short order may be stayed/ suspended. They submitted that they have been elected on a reserve seat and has been duly notified by the ECP and have taken oath as members of the Parliament, thus vested right has accrued in favour of them, which cannot be denied without affording them a right to hearing.

They further submitted that the July 12 order having been passed behind the back of the petitioners is a nullity and liable to be quashed.

“Without prejudice to the foregoing, giving 15 day period to the 41 returned candidates who contested election as independent and who have already joined SIC is against Rule 92 (6) of the Election Rules 2017 which state that once an independent candidate has joined a political party, there is no option to recall or cancel,” the PMLN lawmakers contended.

They submitted that the direction by the court allowing the returned candidates, who on their own free will have joined the SIC, to join any other political party is in violation of the Constitution and amounts to re-writing the Constitution, which is not permissible.

The apex court order is unconstitutional and liable to be reversed, the petitioners submitted.

They submitted that the order has given 15 days period to the returned candidates who have already joined a political party to again give their option to join any other political party is in clear contradiction to the Constitution.

They contended that Constitution in terms of Article 51 (6) (d) and (e) only gives a period of three days to the returned candidates to decide which political party to join, adding that the court by devising a new procedure not mandated by Constitution, rather in violation of the Constitution, has transgressed its jurisdiction, which is an error apparent on the face of the record, hence the order may be recalled.

They further submitted that the order could not have been passed with declaring certain provisions of the Election Act 2017 and the Election Rules 2017 to be ultra vires of the Constitution.

“The declaration issued by the court could not by any stretch of imagination be issued under Article 51(6)(d) & (e),” the petitioners submitted, adding that said laws and constitutional provision being on the statute books, the July 12 order may be recalled.