ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the court office to remove objections and place before an appropriate bench a set of petitions, separately moved by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan and Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, challenging recent amendments to the Elections Act 2017.

A two-judge SC bench comprising Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi set aside the objections raised by the registrar office with an observation that the Pakistani expatriates should be extended facilities on a priority basis as they remit around $30 billion to the country every year.

Prima facie, the matter relating to the voting rights of the overseas Pakistanis falls within the category of public importance and basic fundamental rights, the court observed. The Constitution treated them as citizens of Pakistan yet they had no say in the election arena, the court noted, while recalling a number of decisions have been announced by the court to grant rights of vote to the overseas Pakistanis.

But on the flip side, the court would also need to consider whether in view of the trichotomy of powers it could interfere in the legislative domain or not.

Imran seeks funding for Nadra to develop new i-voting system within a set time frame

Moved through Advocate Uzair Karamat Bhandari on behalf of the PTI and its chairman, the petition sought a direction for the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to provide effective right to vote to Overseas Pakistanis in the upcoming general elections besides necessary approvals and funds be granted to the National Database and Registration Authority (Nadra) for developing new i-voting system within a strict time frame so that it could be place for its use in the upcoming general elections.

Also, on behalf of former interior minister Sheikh Rashid, Advocate Sajeel Sheryar Swati pleaded before the apex court to declare Amendment to Section 94 of the Elections Act, 2017 ‘unconstitutional’ and order the government to allow the overseas Pakistanis to cast vote before the next general elections. The petition also argued that the vote was a constitutional right and was more fundamental than any other right as existence of a democratic society was dependent upon exercise of adult franchise.

Referring to the arguments that the right of vote to the overseas was not being granted due to the fear of rigging, the court observed, “We have proper laws to check the exercise of fake votes in rigging, also wondering if we should stop holding elections because of the fear of rigging in the elections.”

The PTI’s petition argued that questions of public importance in the petition had been raised with reference to the enforcement of fundamental rights conferred under Articles 17 (right to form association) and 25 (equality of citizens) of the Constitution. In fact the Supreme Court entertained similar petitions in its original constitutional jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution and passed 2014 and the 2018 judgments and therefore the present petition under Article 184(3) of the Constitution was competent, the petition argued.

The petition named the secretaries of parliamentary affairs, law and justice, overseas Pakistanis and human resources development and the foreign affairs, Election Commission of Pakistan and Nadra as respondents in the case.

The petitioner challenged the amendments to Section 94(1) of the Elections Act 2017, which was notified on June 22.

The PTI chairman believed that the amendments violated the fundamental rights to vote of over 10 million overseas Pakistanis as enshrined in the Constitution and as recognized by different judgments of the Supreme Court.

Also, Mr Rashid in his petition had contended that through the recent amendments in the Elections Act, the right to vote granted by the Constitution to the overseas Pakistanis had been hindered, delayed and actually blocked — something that was neither in consonance with the constitutional spirit nor democratic norms, nor could be justified on any constitutional standard.

Published in Dawn, August 25th, 2022

Opinion

Editorial

Half measures
Updated 14 Dec, 2024

Half measures

The question remains: Were suspects' prolonged detention, subsequent trial, and punishments ever legal in eyes of the law?
Engaging with Kabul
14 Dec, 2024

Engaging with Kabul

WHILE relations with the Afghan Taliban have been testy of late, mainly because of the feeling in Islamabad that the...
Truant ministers
Updated 14 Dec, 2024

Truant ministers

LAWMAKERS from both the opposition and treasury benches have been up in arms about what they see as cabinet...
A political resolution
Updated 13 Dec, 2024

A political resolution

It seems that there has been some belated realisation that a power vacuum has been created at expense of civilian leadership.
High price increases
13 Dec, 2024

High price increases

FISCAL stabilisation prescribed by the IMF can be expensive — for the common people — in more ways than one. ...
Beyond HOTA
13 Dec, 2024

Beyond HOTA

IN a welcome demonstration of HOTA’s oversight role, kidney transplant services have been suspended at...