• CB to hear pleas seeking review of July 12 short order today
• PML-N says relief granted to PTI was ‘self-created’

ISLAMABAD: As the 11-judge constitutional bench (CB) resumes on Tuesday (today) hearing on a set of petitions seeking to review the July 12 majority short order of giving reserved seats to the opposition PTI, the ruling PML-N on Monday pleaded that the verdict did not in any way come within the jurisdiction vested in the Supreme Court or the Constitution.

Moved by senior counsel Haris Azmat on behalf of PML-N, additional grounds contended that from Feb 22, 2024 when various parties were contesting for the reserved seats, PTI never filed any petition either before the Election Commission of Pakistan, Peshawar High Court (PHC) or the Supreme Court for the purpose.

The additional grounds contended that for all intents and purposes, PTI was never made a party to the present review petition as its impleadment application was never allowed.

In view of these undisputed facts, the findings recorded in the detailed reasoning by the majority judges were incorrect and liable to be reviewed, it added.

The SC’s detailed judgement, it pointed out, acknowledged that procedural formalities had been ignored but Article 187 (complete justice) of the Constitution had been relied upon to grant relief to the PTI.

The majority judgement had failed to cite any past precedent to support its opinion, which is against the settled jurisprudence of the apex court, the additional grounds regretted.

It added that detailed reasoning had also lost sight of the fact that they were hearing then an appeal under Article 185(3) against a PHC order and that it was not a petition in public interest filed under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, therefore, the question to invoke Article 187 did not arise.

Furthermore, the petitioner was not given an opportunity or a right to be heard on the point that reserved seats cannot be granted to the PTI, which was not impleaded as a party before this court nor was a party before the two forums below, the PML-N stated.

These findings were so shocking and surprising that even some of the members of the bench recorded their separate reasoning on the same.

According to the additional grounds, the relief granted to the PTI was self-created and had been carved out by the majority, as none had claimed this relief in the proceedings.

Besides, not only the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) had been denied the relief claimed by it, but all those who had joined the SIC were also taken off for the rest of the tenure of the National and provincial assemblies.

Thus, the PML-N stated, the SIC was kicked out of the assemblies.

The additional grounds explained that the issue was simply the matter of post-general elections directly related to the reserved seats for both women and

non-Muslims on the basis of proportional representation system of political parties’ lists of candidates under Articles 51 and 106 of the Constitution.

The majority’s short order in effect created a new parliamentary party in the National Assembly and three provincial assemblies and since this related to the pre-election process, it is clearly and unequivocally not an issue before the Supreme Court, the PML-N said.

In the process of general elections all events are scheduled and time-bound and the same cannot be reversed, the ruling party highlighted, adding that the PHC order had been set aside by the majority’s short order to the extent that it is inconsistent with the majority’s short order.

This is incomprehensible as none of the rights, which have now been created in favour of the PTI by the majority’s short order, were an issue before the high court, nor had they been adjudicated upon.

The high court had simply dismissed the SIC’s claim to the reserved seats.

It is clear that the superstructure created by the majority’s short order does not in any way come within the ambit of the jurisdiction vested in this court or the Constitution, the additional grounds said.

Published in Dawn, May 13th, 2025