ISLAMABAD: An election tribunal of the Pakistan Bar Council headed by Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed of the Supreme Court summoned on Wednesday record of the recent elections of the highest supervisory body of lawyers on a petition moved by Raja Mohammad Shafqat Abbasi, a losing candidate.

Mr Abbasi had challenged the election of his rival Shoaib Shaheen who later became a member of the PBC in the Dec 21, 2015, elections for the Islamabad seat.

The tribunal asked Mr Shaheen to submit his reply by March 17.

The elections were held in the office of the Advocate General, Islamabad, in the Islamabad High Court building. The constituency consists of five voters, who are members of the Islamabad Bar Council.

In his petition, Mr Abbasi argued that numerous illegalities and irregularities had taken place during the polling and vote counting, making the entire election process doubtful.

Citing examples, the petitioner said that the ballot paper was issued to Wajid Ali Gillani, the chairman of Islamabad Bar Council’s executive committee who cast his vote in the morning but later submitted an application to the presiding officer for issuance of a fresh ballot paper on the ground that the first ballot paper was inadvertently filled with a mistake.

Mr Abbasi objected at 2:15pm that the voter had already exercised his right and he was not entitled for issuance of a fresh ballot paper. The new ballot paper can only be issued if the first is damaged / destroyed or cannot be used.

The Islamabad Bar Council’s secretary, however, recorded the objection in presence of the presiding officer at about 3pm, just at the brink of closure of polling time. The presiding officer said that he would announce reasons later for issuing the fresh ballot paper.

Later the petitioner came to know through media about counting of the second ballot paper as a result of which Mr Shaheen secured three votes against two bagged by him (petitioner).

Had the first vote of Mr Gillani been counted or rejected, the result of polling would have been different because there was no legal justification for the issuance of the second ballot paper, the petition said.

The petitioner said that the voter had deliberately circled the first ballot paper by which he could be identified. Such ballot paper was invalid as per rule 51 (3d) and liable to be rejected/excluded, he said.

Published in Dawn, February 25th, 2016