In a legal setback for the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Bench has ruled that the Imran Khan-founded party is not entitled to reserved seats for women and minorities in the national and provincial assemblies.
The decision was announced by a 10-member constitutional bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan on Friday.
The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), and Election Commission of Pakistan have filed review petitions against last year’s Supreme Court July 12, 2024, ruling that the PTI was entitled to reserved seats for women and minorities in the national and provincial assemblies.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah of the SC’s full bench announced the 8-5 majority verdict, nullifying the Peshawar High Court’s (PHC) order wherein it had upheld the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) decision denying the reserved seats to the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC).
In its July 12 verdict, eight out of 13 judges ruled that 39 out of a list of 80 MNAs were and are the returned candidates of the PTI.
Initially, a full-strength 13-member larger bench led by Justice Aminuddin Khan began hearing the review petitions on May 6. However, Justices Ayesha Malik and Shahid Waheed Abbasi declared the petitions inadmissible and recused themselves from further proceedings.
The bench’s head noted in the order that both judges had voluntarily stepped aside.
Earlier in the day, SC Justice Salahuddin Panhwar also recused himself from being a part of the bench citing lawyer Hamid Khan’s objection over the inclusion of some judges in the bench.
Justice Ayesha Malik later formally raised a complaint with Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi, objecting that her dissenting note was not uploaded on the Supreme Court’s official website.
The Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) — an ally of the PTI in the 2024 general elections and a petitioner in the reserved seats case — had urged the bench to defer the proceedings until the constitutional challenges to the 26th Amendment were resolved.
The SIC also called for the inclusion of judges who had originally heard the matter. However, the constitutional bench rejected both requests, with Justice Aminuddin noting that, under the 26th Amendment, review petitions could legally be heard by a bench smaller than the one that issued the original verdict.
— This is a developing story and is being updated with more details.
