The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected as “not maintainable” a petition submitted by the Defense Ministry urging the withdrawal of an earlier judgment directing the conduct of elections in Punjab on May 14 over security concerns, but allowed for some deviation as a result of talks between political stakeholders.
In addition to the Ministry of Defense petition, filed by the federal government, the apex court also rejected a plea of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) seeking the restoration of Oct. 8 as the date for polls to the Punjab Assembly. In its order, a three-member bench—led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justices Ijazul Ahsan and Munib Akhtar—said the petition was seeking to “re-agitate” previously decided matters. “It is impermissible to attempt to so reopen issues and questions that already stand finally decided,” read the order.
However, during a hearing on the two petitions, the apex court clubbed together a separate petition filed by a citizen, Sardar Kashif Khan, which had called for a resolution to the ongoing impasse over elections through dialogue. In this regard, the apex court issued notices to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (Fazl), Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P), Balochistan National Party (Mengal), Awami National Party, Balochistan Awami Party, Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid), the law secretary, ECP, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan and the Jamaat-e-Islami. All the respondents have been directed to send their senior office-bearers for today’s (Thursday) hearing at 11:30 a.m.
ANP leader Aimal Wali Khan, in a posting on Twitter, has refused to appear before the three-member bench, stating it has “no credibility” left. “If ANP felt the need to talk to PTI, it will directly do so and not appear before its three member proxy team,” he added.
Earlier, during proceedings, the AGP informed the bench that he had met with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and it had been decided that political engagement was needed to lower political temperatures. He urged the court to provide time to the political parties to resolve the matter, noting both the PMLN and PPP had already constituted committees to advance dialogue with the PTI. Appreciating the AGP’s statement, the CJP remarked that it suggested that the political process was ongoing. However, he maintained that the order directing polls in Punjab on May 14 could not be reversed.
“I don’t think this court can postpone the date for long,” Justice Bandial observed, noting the resistance by the ECP, federal government and defense ministry in complying with the May 14 election date. In its order, the bench criticized the federal cabinet’s seeking of parliamentary approval for the release of funds required by the ECP for elections. Equating the funding request with a “money bill,” the court observed that its rejection by Parliament suggested “serious constitutional implications” such as the government losing the confidence of the majority of the members of the National Assembly. Noting the AGP had categorically rejected this, it said then it could be “regarded as anomalous” and thus the resulting situation could be rapidly rectified. “A disobedience and defiance of the orders of the court can itself have serious consequences,” it warned and directed the AGP to ensure the federal cabinet and prime minister remedied the matter at the earliest.
Dialogue
During the hearing, the CJP acknowledged that without dialogue between political forces, any elections could potentially become a battlefield and urged the PTI to commit to the political process.
Advocate Shah Khawar, representing citizen Sardar Kashif, argued that peaceful, honest, just and fair elections required mutual respect and understanding among participating political parties. He also stressed that simultaneous elections were necessary, as staggered polls risked influencing subsequent elections and making them controversial.
Accepting his plea, the court said this could not negate its earlier order directing elections in Punjab on May 14. “This is for the reason that political dialogue must not be made a means for avoiding the imperative obligation under Articles 112 and 224 of the Constitution to hold the elections to the provincial assembly with 90 days of its dissolution,” it observed, adding “we appreciate the initiative taken by the petitioner to propose the initiation of a political dialogue as a means for settling a practical and feasible date on which general elections, that satisfy the requirement of Article 218(3) of the Constitution, are held.”
The CJP remarked that the court was willing to “make room” to change the date for polls if all political parties came together, but stressed that the issue should not be prolonged.