ISLAMABAD, Feb 6: The Supreme Court, which took up twenty-five petitions challenging the bar on those who were defeated in general elections from running for the Senate, would conclude the case on Friday.

The apex court, which after allowing all the petitioners to contest the Senate elections as an interim measure, had adjourned the case for an indefinite period. Asfandyar Wali of ANP petitioned the court to decide the plea before the holding of the Senate polls.

It was argued by the ANP leader that in case the SC in its final decision rejected the petitions, its share in the Senate would go to some other party as under the Senate election rules, the next candidate is declared elected in case the winner is disqualified on any ground.

On Thursday, Ayub Khattak, who was the first one to challenge the Article 2AA of the Conduct of General Elections Order, 2002, sought to withdraw his petition as his party had not given him the Senate ticket.

Advocate Raja Ibrahim Satti, representing one of the petitioners, argued that the order did not reflect the will of the people as it was introduced by a military man.

He said the original 1973 Constitution contained only three qualifications and four disqualifications, but the next military ruler introduced 18 more disqualifications.

The counsel said the present regime was also adding to the list of disqualifications for the members of parliament.

Advocate Satti argued that it could not be presumed that a person who contested the election would win the election. He said that losing the election was part of the game.

Upon the court’s asking that how many politicians, who had lost the October elections, emerged victor in the by-elections, it was informed that Imtiaz Shaikh from Sindh and Raja Basharat from Punjab had won the by-elections, although they had been defeated in the October elections.

The counsel pointed out that the non-Muslims and women, who had lost in the general elections, were permitted to contest on special seats reserved for women and minorities.

He said the Article 8AA of the Conduct of General Elections Order, 2002, was discriminatory in nature, and thus violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

Advocate Ahmad Raza Qasuri, representing Syed Jalal Shah, former speaker of Sindh Assembly, argued that the Article 2AA of CGE Order, 2002, fell in the category of double jeopardy, which was prohibited.

He said the losing candidate was first punished by the electorate and then by not being allowed to contest the Senate polls.

Justice Munir A. Shaikh observed that the minimum age for an MNA is 25 years, and for a Senator it is fixed at 30 years, and inquired if it could be called a case of double jeopardy.

Javed Jabbar, appearing in person, as his counsel, Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, could not appear because of poor health, requested that one part of his petition in which he had challenged the legality of LFO be left undecided till the time his counsel was able to appear on his behalf. However, he advanced arguments with regard to the Article 8AA of the CGE Order, 2002.

Mr Jabbar, without naming the ministers of previous government, said that some members of the cabinet were instrumental in the promulgation of the law, which favoured them.

He said that taking part in election “is an affirmative action” and good for democracy.

Syed Iftikhar Hussain Gillani, counsel representing Ayaz Khan Jogezai, sought court’s permission to start arguments on Friday.