ISLAMABAD: PTI dissenter and ex-MPA from Punjab Zahara Batool on Monday challenged in the Supreme Court the May 20 Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) decision to de-seat 25 dissidents who had voted for PML-N’s Hamza Shehbaz in the election for the Punjab chief minister.

In her petition, moved through counsel Abdul Shakoor Paracha, Ms Batool requested the apex court to set aside the ECP decision which dubbed them defectors under Article 63-A of the Constitution.

The ECP through chief election commissioner (CEC), PTI chairman Imran Khan and the party’s parliamentary leader in Punjab Muhammad Sibtain Khan were cited as respondents in the petition.

The petitioner wondered whether the ECP, while exercising power under Article 63A, could take additional documents as evidence and decide the declaration which was never forwarded to the members by the Punjab Assembly speaker. And whether the ECP could take into consideration documents which were never before the party head or relied upon by the party head while issuing the declaration, she asked.

“In the absence of directives from the parliamentary party, the petitioner was not bound to vote for Pervez Elahi [a joint candidate of the PML-Q and PTI] and no such directives were issued not to vote for any other candidate,” the petition emphasised, adding that the purported show-cause notice was never issued to the petitioner and nothing was available on record about its service.

“Thus in the absence of show-cause notices, all other proceedings encompassing the subsequent declarations were of no avail,” it argued.

The petition recalled how Punjab Assembly Speaker Pervez Elahi forwarded a declaration to the CEC in terms of Article 63A on April 19, along with the April 18 declaration, April 16 show-cause notice by PTI secretary general Asad Umar, another show-cause notice of April 7 and the division list for the election of the chief minister held on April 16.

The petition argued that Article 63A(b) was not automatic and dependent upon fulfilment of mandatory conditions as laid down in the provision, adding that the election for the chief minister was scheduled for April 3 and the purported show-cause notices were issued on April 2 in pursuance of alleged directives, which could not be delivered on Feb 3.

Another notice/letter was purportedly issued by Asad Umar, which was also not clear about the meeting of the parliamentary party and the minutes of the meeting that were only allegedly forwarded to Subtain Khan and showed that the minutes were not circulated to all the respondents, the appeal argued.

In the absence of any directive, the alleged defection against the 25 MPAs is not covered by Article 63A(b)(i), the appeal argued, citing a recent Supreme Court judgement which in unequivocal words held that the issuance of formal directives, followed by the show-cause notice and opportunity of hearing, was mandatory pre-requisite before making a declaration under Article 63A, the petition argued.

No documents can be brought on record at such a belated stage, it said, adding that PTI was bound to enclose all the available evidence with declarations. The petition said the new case could not be allowed to be built up in the wake of rejoinders, which the party moved before the ECP belatedly.

Published in Dawn, May 31st, 2022