ISLAMABAD: The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Tuesday directed the counsel for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s son-in-law retired Captain Mohammad Safdar to file by Aug 17 a written reply to the allegations levelled in a petition seeking his disqualification as member of the National Assembly.

The directive was issued by a full bench of the ECP, headed by Chief Election Commissioner retired Justice Sardar Mohammad Raza, which had taken up the petition of Nawabzada Salahuddin of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) who had lost Mansehra’s NA seat to Capt Safdar during the 2013 general elections.

The highlight of Tuesday’s hearing was a challenge to the ECP’s jurisdiction to hear the case from the respondent’s counsel, Barrister Munawar Iqbal Duggal.

A written statement filed by Capt Safdar through the counsel said that the complaint revolved around allegations of corrupt practices and a false declaration in the statement of assets and subsequent yearly statements. It said the complaint filed under Section 94 of the Representation of Peoples Act 1976, seeking disqualification of the respondent from being a member of parliament, merited dismissal both on factual and legal grounds.

“However, while reserving the right to submit a detailed reply on facts, the question of jurisdiction of this honourable commission is raised through the instant application because the question of jurisdiction goes to the very root of the matter, being a substantial question of law, and the complaint can be disposed of on the question of jurisdiction.”

It said on the basis of the allegations it had been asserted that the respondent did not fulfil the requirements of being a member of parliament.

It prayed that the disqualification plea be rejected and the petitioner be burdened with heavy cost for filing a ‘false and vexatious complaint’.

Advocate Faisal Chaudhry, appearing for the petitioner, argued that though it was a right of the respondent to raise an objection over the commission’s jurisdiction, he was required to file a written reply as had been sought by it repeatedly.

The CEC asked the respondent’s counsel to respond to the allegations levelled in the petition. According to Advocate Chaudhry, the ECP had refused to admit the application challenging its jurisdiction and had received it on the condition that it would be filed by the next date of hearing on Aug 17.

He said a plea of the respondent’s counsel that he was travelling on a date was also rejected by the ECP, observing that a reply could be drafted overnight.

Published in Dawn, August 10th, 2016