Supreme Court stays LHC order on election tribunals – Pakistan

• Asks the Chief Justice of the LHC and the CEC for “meaningful consultations” to resolve the dispute
• CJP says no to continued disregard for justice
• PTI’s objection to CJP’s presence rejected
• The case is based on whether ECP or LHC has priority in appointing the Tribunal

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the Lahore High Court’s June 12 notification setting up eight election tribunals in Punjab and the high court’s ruling that its chief justice has the final say in setting up tribunals to settle election disputes.

Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court stayed the notification to pave the way for meaningful consultations between the recently appointed LHC Chief Justice Aalia Neelum and Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikandar Sultan Raja on the formation of tribunals.

The CJP’s order was issued on the request of Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, representing the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

The Supreme Court was hearing an appeal from the ECP seeking the final decision on whether the Commission or the LHC should have priority in the appointment of courts.

The appeal, filed by senior advocate Mohmand, seeks to set aside the finding of the LHC that the Chief Justice of the LHC has primacy or precedence in the appointment of election tribunals under Article 219(c) read with Article 222(b) of the Constitution under Section 140 of the Election Act, 2017.

“We are confident that the meeting will be held immediately after the notification of the appointment of Justice Aalia Neelum as CJ-LHC and after her swearing in,” the Supreme Court order said. “The court did not want to interfere with the jurisdiction of the parliamentary committee which has to approve the recommendation of the Judicial Commission of Pakistan for the appointment of Justice Aalia Neelum as CJ-LHC.”

The CJP expressed hope that ECP would not behave unreasonably during the meeting between the CEC and the CJ of the LHC and would conduct it in a manner that would boost the confidence of the people in the institution.

“Be transparent in your approach and do not allow yourself to be accused of being selective or undermining any institution,” the CJP said.

According to the LHC notification dated June 12, eight tribunals have been set up to adjudicate petitions related to the 2024 general elections.

According to the notification, Justice Shahid Karim was appointed as the chairman of the tribunal to decide disputes in Gujranwala, Gujrat, Hafizabad, Mandi Bahauddin and Narowal districts. Justice Chaudhry Muhammad Iqbal had to decide cases relating to Faisalabad, Chiniot, Toba Tek Singh, Jhang, Pakpattan, Okara, Sargodha and Khushab districts.

Similarly, Justice Anwaar Hussain handled cases for Lahore and Justice Sultan Tanvir Ahmad handled cases for Kasur, Sheikhupura, Nankana Sahib and Sialkot districts. Justice Asim Hafeez handled cases for Bahawalpur, Bahawalnagar, Rahim Yar Khan and Lodhran.

Similarly, Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar was appointed as the tribunal to settle disputes relating to DG Khan, Layyah, Muzaffargarh and Rajanpur districts, Justice Raheel Kamran for Multan, Bhakkar, Khanewal, Vehari and Sahiwal districts and Justice Mirza Viqas Rauf for Rawalpindi, Jhelum, Chakwal, Attock, Mianwali and Tehsil Sarai Alamgir districts.

CJP Isa observed that the country will be destroyed if two constitutional bodies start fighting each other. He recalled that the election date was fixed without undermining the office of the President when the Supreme Court asked both the President and the ECP to consult and fix a date. This procedure can be replicated, he said.

Referring to the ECP advisor, the CJP wondered what stopped the ECP from asking the LHC CJ for a meeting, adding that there might be differences of opinion but it could be resolved through a personal meeting. He wondered why the differences should be made public.

The counsel said deliberations were still underway and added that ECP was waiting for the response of the LHC CJ regarding the date of the meeting.

PTI objection

Niazullah Niazi, a member of the PTI’s core committee, initially objected to the CJP’s presence in the larger body.

CJP Isa rejected the suggestion on the grounds that the constant scandal-mongering of judges must now end and asked why Mr Niazi’s case should not be referred to the Disciplinary Committee of the Pakistan Bar Council for debarment.

“Are we here to be insulted?” the CJP lamented, adding: “Enough is enough.”

“We are aware of your political affiliation and will not tolerate continued disregard for the judiciary. This must end,” the CJP said, reminding him that the authority to constitute benches now rests with the Practice and Procedure Committee, marking the end of the era when the CJP called the shots on the matter.

When Mr. Niazi, referring to PTI leader Imran Khan, said that the detainee also had objections to the removal of his election symbol, the CJP reminded him that the court had provided a video link from the prison and no objections had been raised at that time. Moreover, he noted that PTI lawyer Ali Zafar had also not raised any objections in the intra-party election proceedings.

This defamation of institutions must stop making headlines raising the question of the composition of the court, the CJP said.

The CJP asked the petitioner Salman Akram Raja to perform a difficult task and stated that the court expected him as a senior advocate to ask his junior advocate to behave like a court officer and not like a party leader.

Published in Dawn, July 5, 2024