ISLAMABAD: Proceedings in contempt of Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and chief election commissioner (CEC) case against PTI Chairman Imran Khan and two other leaders of the party ended in a couple of minutes on Tuesday as none of the accused or their counsel turned up.

“Let us pass an order,” ECP member from Sindh Nisar Durrani, who heads the four-member bench hearing the case, remarked.

Two other PTI leaders facing the contempt case include Asad Umar and Fawad Chaudhry.

Mr Umar had appeared for the first time before the ECP bench on Feb 1 and had been asked to submit a reply to the show-cause notice. A reply containing an apology had been filed by Mr Umar’s counsel which the PTI leader later announced to retract. Advocate Faisal Fareed, while appearing before the bench as a counsel for Imran Khan and Fawad Chaudhry, had filed objections against the case.

The written objections, a copy of which is available with Dawn, pointed out that under Section 11(3) of the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003, any such member whose contempt has been alleged and proceedings initiated, is barred from sitting as adjudicator in his own case.

In his objections, ex-PM says notices have been challenged in Lahore High Court

“The impugned notice in paragraph 4 specifically states that the applicant has allegedly, willfully and intentionally scandalised, ridiculed and maligned this commission and the members of the commission in order to bring the commission and its members into hatred in eyes of the general public,” the identical objections read.

“Accordingly, since it is alleged, that all the members are aggrieved of the alleged contempt of the applicant, therefore, under section 11(3), the members are barred and cannot sit as an adjudicator in the instant matter,” they said.

It has also been pointed out that the PTI has challenged the vires of Section 10 of the Election Act, 2017, on the touchstone of Article 204, as the ECP was neither a court or a tribunal, as held in many judgements of the superior courts and, therefore, it cannot be given the power to commence or proceed with contempt proceedings.

The PTI chief in his objections said the notice as well as show-cause notice had also been challenged by him in the Lahore High Court.

He said the orders of the high court shall have a blanket effect on the legality of these proceedings.

It would be “appropriate to cause the proceedings to be halted at this stage, that should the high court come to the conclusion that Section 10 of the Elections Act, 2017, is ultra vires to the Constitution, the entire proceedings would abate, but in the meantime serious prejudice would have been caused to the PTI, which if this Commission is not bias, would consider and halt the proceedings”, he said in his objections.

It has also been stressed that the commission is defined by the Constitution which cannot be altered or modified.

“Neither the notice nor the show-cause notice, have been issued by the rightful authority and the secretary of ECP or the DG of Law cannot assume authority to issue any notice or show-cause notice without express provision of law authorising them,” Mr Khan said. The response filed by Mr Umar also contained similar arguments.

Published in Dawn, March 1st, 2023