ISLAMABAD: An 11-member constitutional bench on Wednesday transferred to a smaller bench a plea to initiate contempt charges against the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) for not implementing the July 12, 2024 verdict that allocated reserved seats to the PTI.

Headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, the larger constitutional bench transferred the contempt case to the smaller bench in a bid to protect the rights of parties to institute Intra-Court Appeal (ICA) against any adverse decision.

The bench, however, postponed further proceedings of the review petitions seeking to revisit the last year judgement till May 13.

The case was adjourned on the request of senior counsel Hamid Khan who at the outset pleaded before the court that senior counsel Faisal Siddiqui who was representing the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) could not reach Islamabad from Karachi due to flights suspension.

Advocate Haris Azmat representing PML-N requested the court that he could advance his arguments without delay.

However, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar explained that hearing at this juncture would not be proper since right to audience should be afforded to everybody.

In its July 12 short order, the SC, by a majority of eight to five, held that the 41 returned candidates out of 80 MNAs were and are the returned candidates of the PTI and, therefore, members of PTI’s parliamentary party in the National Assembly for all constitutional and legal purposes.

About the size of the bench, Justice Aminuddin said since Justice Ayesha A. Malik and Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi had already rejected the review petitions, they were not on the bench. Their opinions would be counted in the main decision.

When senior counsel Salman Akram Raja, on behalf of Kanwal Shauzab who filed the contempt case, requested the court to ann­ounce a shorter date, Jus­tice Aminuddin explai­n­ed the committee constituted to decide fixation of cases before the constitutio­nal bench would also determine when to hear the matter.

Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail added that the committee would decide to fix the matter before the constitutional bench or refer it to the committee constituted under the SC Practice and Procedure Act, 2023.

While pointing to Advo­cate Sajeel Shaharyar Swati, Justice Mandokhail asked why Chief Election Commi­ssioner Sikander Sul­tan Raja and other ECP me­­m­bers were not present in court. At this, the counsel explained that personal app­earance become necessary when court issues show-ca­use notice but in the present case it was a simple notice.

Justice Mandokhail reminded him that the contempt case was not a civil matter but a criminal case therefore their presence was necessary. The judge also asked the counsel to ensure their presence before the start of next hearing in the contempt case. However, Justice Aminuddin was of the opinion that the court had not asked them to appear in person.

Published in Dawn, May 8th, 2025