LAHORE, May 23: An election tribunal of the Lahore High Court is set to hear an appeal on Saturday against the acceptance of PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif’s nomination papers for the by-election to NA-123, Lahore.
The appeal has confronted Mr Sharif with a dilemma as he does not recognise as bona fide those judges who took oath on PCO after the imposition of emergency.
Mr Sharif’s counsel told Dawn that although Mr Sharif did not recognise the PCO judges, he reserved the right to reply to allegations raised in the appeal.
“We don’t have any expectation from the PCO judges, but at the same time we reserve the right to reply to the allegations because in this case we are not the appellant,” said MNA Naseer Ahmad Bhutta.
“If Mr Sharif chooses to engage a counsel, the counsel will have the right to not only oppose the appeals but also to take up the issue of legitimacy of judges,” said advocate Ashtr Ausaf.
The appellant, Mian Ikhlaq Gudu, a candidate for NA-123, said Mr Sharif had lied in stating that he fulfilled qualification to contest elections in line with Article 62.
He said Mr Sharif could not contest the election because an anti-terrorism court had sentenced him to life imprisonment and fined Rs500,000 in the plane hijacking case in 2000.
He said the conviction as well as the sentence was upheld by the learned appellate court in a special criminal appeal.
Besides, he was convicted by an accountability court in Attock Fort in July 2007 under the NAB Ordinance and sentenced to 14 years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs20 million.
He said the accountability court had also disqualified Mr Sharif for 21 years from seeking or being elected, chosen, appointed as member or representative of any public office or any authority of the Local Government of Pakistan.
The appellant said in both cases, Mr Sharif had been convicted by competent courts and the convictions were still intact because these had not been set aside.
Moreover, the petitioner added, Mr Sharif could not contest the election because he was not a “sagacious, righteous and non-profligate and honest and ameen” person as evident from his conviction by the accountability court on charges of dishonesty, misappropriation of funds and misuse of authority.
The appellant also referred to Mr Sharif’s application to the Chief Election Commissioner against the rejection of his nomination papers.
Mr Gudu said in order to avoid criminal liabilities, Mr Sharif agreed to 10 years exile in exchange for his release.
However, during his exile he kept denying entering into an agreement and later breached the same by returning to Pakistan before the lapse of 10 years.
Mr Sharif later on admitted the execution of the undertaking regarding his exile but only after the documents were placed before the Supreme Court.
He said a full bench of the high court had already decided that “during the process of scrutiny, if any objection is raised against any candidate on the basis of lack of required qualification to contest elections, the burden to prove such qualification is heavier on the candidate than the objector”.