ISLAMABAD: More than two years after the General Elections of February 2024, election tribunals across Pakistan have yet to dispose of nearly a third of election petitions. As a result, dozens of lawmakers continue to hold office under a legal cloud with 128 cases still awaiting adjudication, according to the Free and Fair Election Network (Fafen).

By the end of April 2026, election tribunals had decided 246, or 66 per cent, of the 374 petitions filed against GE-2024 outcomes in 113 National Assembly and 236 Provincial Assembly constituencies. Of these, 73 out of 124 petitions pertaining to National Assembly constituencies and 173 out of 250 petitions about Provincial Assemblies have been disposed of.

Under Section 142 of the Elections Act, candidates may contest election results within 45 days of the gazette notification of a returned candidate, while Section 148(5) requires tribunals to decide each petition within 180 days of filing. The legally prescribed timeline for disposing of petitions expired in October 2024.

Tribunal proceedings beyond this window are subject to special conditions, including mandatory cost payments for adjournments, recorded reasons where tribunals adjourn cases on their own motion, and the potential suspension of assembly membership where delay is attributable to a returned candidate. According to Fafen, no such suspensions have been recorded to date.

Pace slowing after Punjab delay

According to the Fafen report, the pace of disposal has slowed in recent months. Compared with 171 petitions decided by July 31,2025 — when Fafen issued its eighth update – only 75 petitions have been decided over the subsequent nine months, averaging eight per month. This is below the monthly average of 10 petitions decided between February 2024 and July 2025.

Tribunal appointments faced significant delays in Punjab, where only two tribunals functioned until October 2024 amid a legal tussle between the Lahore High Court and ECP over appointments. The Supreme Court upheld ECP’s appeal on Sept 30, 2024, and ECP reconstituted eight tribunals for Punjab on Oct 3, 2024.

Meanwhile, disposal rates vary sharply by province. Balochistan leads with 49 out of 52 petitions decided, or 94pc, followed by Punjab with 147 out of 192, or 77pc, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa with 26 out of 43, or 60pc, and Sindh with 24 out of 84, or 29pc. None of the petitions from Islamabad constituencies have been disposed of amidst pending litigation in the Islamabad High Court over the ECP’s transfer of election petitions from one tribunal to another.

One result overturned so far

Of the 246 decided petitions, tribunals dismissed 242 and accepted only four — all from Balochistan — where repolling was ordered at selected polling stations.

So far, only one GE-2024 result has been overturned: NA-251 Sherani/ Zhob/ Killa Saifullah. In this case, the Supreme Court set aside the tribunal’s repolling order and declared the PkNAP candidate returned, holding that the Returning Officer had “deliberately and unlawfully altered the results of Form 45”.

As many as 123 of the 246 decided tribunal decisions have been challenged before the Supreme Court, which has so far decided 18 appeals, fully or partially accepting three and rejecting 15. The remaining 105 appeals are pending. By affiliation, 64 appeals were filed by PTI-backed independents, 11 by PML-N, nine by unaffiliated independents, seven by JUIP, and three by PPPP.

Party-wise trends

Among the political parties that contested the elections, PTI-backed independents filed the most petitions: 206, or 55pc of all cases. Their disposal rate is 60pc. PML-N candidates filed 48 petitions with 75pc decided, PPPP 28 with 61pc decided, JUIP 25 with 64pc decided.

Fafen also noted uneven public access to tribunal proceedings and records. Petition memos, hearing details, and judgments remain largely accessible in tribunals comprising sitting judges of the Sindh, Balochistan, and Peshawar High Courts. By contrast, Punjab tribunals — which account for over half of all cases — have provided access only to case-status information, withholding petition memos, judgments, and related documents. According to Fafen, this meant reasons for dismissal in 63 cases remained unknown.