- “Ind candidates not to get reserved seats unless join a party”.
- “SIC neither contested general polls nor filed list for reserved seats”.
- SIC appeal to weaken parties participating in electoral process: AGP.
The Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) on Wednesday submitted its written response to the Supreme Court in the reserved seats case, stating that the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) “cannot be permitted to make its way into assemblies via backdoor”.
The SIC’s appeal, the AGP stated in its 30-page written submissions to the 13-member full court, for reserved seats should be dismissed and the Peshawar High Court’s (PHC) verdict on the matter should be upheld.
The attorney general, while elaborating on the allocation mechanism, said that reserved seats for minorities and women could be given to a political who contested the polls and won at least one seat besides providing a list of candidates based on the total number of seats it won as per the law.
Furthermore, independent candidates could not automatically become relevant for reserved seats under a parties’ list system unless they join a political party.
“Independently elected candidates are counted towards reserved seats for women and non-Muslims only when they join political parties within 3 days of publication of names of the returned candidates in the official Gazette” under Articles 51(6)(d) and (e), as well as 106(3)(c), the AGP’s response read.
The SIC neither contested the general elections as a political party nor filed any list of candidates for reserved seats for women and non-Muslims, under Section 104 of the Election Act, 2017, it further stated.
Subsequently, the aforesaid party did not present its manifesto before the February 8 nationwide polls and its candidates to the voters for their scrutiny.
“The SIC cannot be permitted to use the backdoor to make its way into the assemblies. Allowing so will set a very dangerous precedent,” the AGP said.
“It will permit elements who would otherwise be rejected by the voters to make their way into the assemblies by encouraging independents’ getting elected or luring them to join such parties and benefitting from the allocation of reserved seats.”
The attorney general said that the approval of the SIC’s appeal would be an “antithesis to the democracy” and “will weaken the political parties who participate in the electoral process”.
It further elaborated that the reserved seats for women and non-Muslims would only be allocated to political parties, whereas, independently elected candidates or those parties who have not contested the polls would not be considered for the seats.
PTI’s plea for becoming a party in case
The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has decided to become a party in the reserved seats’ case being heard by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa-led full court and submitted a plea via its chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan.
The petition sought the top court’s permission to be a party in the case after the “Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) levelled “unfounded” allegations on the PTI during the hearing of the SIC’s appeals”.
It read that the PTI and the SIC were deprived of reserved seats despite being eligible. The SIC was ready to provide a list of candidates for the allocations but was denied permission to submit it.
The Imran-founded party blamed the poll organising authority for “unconstitutionally” allocating reserved seats belonging to the PTI-SIC alliance to other political parties which also went against the aspirations of the nationals.
The former ruling party said that SIC Chairman Sahibzada Hamid Raza contested the 2024 general elections and won a seat in Faisalabad’s NA-104 constituency.
It further claimed that Article 51 of the Constitution does not elaborate on obligations to independent candidates to join those political parties who won more than one seat in the polls.
SIC reserved seats issue
The PTI-backed independent candidates, who emerged victorious in the February 8 elections, had joined the SIC in a bid to claim seats reserved for minority and women.
However, this did not help the party as the election commission did not allocate reserved seats to the SIC, citing its failure to submit its list of candidates.
The party had then approached the PHC on the said issue wherein the court upheld the electoral body’s decision.
In April, SIC chief Sahibzada Hamid Raza, along with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly speaker, moved the SC seeking setting aside of the PHC verdict and the allocation of 67 women and 11 minority seats in the assemblies.
On May 6, a three-member SC bench headed by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, including Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Athar Minallah, suspended the PHC verdict.
It then referred the matter to the judges’ committee for the formation of a larger bench since the matter required constitutional interpretation.
Meanwhile, the ECP had last week submitted its response to the apex court, saying the SIC does not qualify for reserved seats as the political party doesn’t allow non-Muslims to be a part of it.
The ECP informed the top court that the reserved seats cannot be allotted to the SIC as the party did not submit the list of candidates before the January 24 deadline.
