<\/p>\n
In a massive blow to PTI, the Supreme Court on Saturday set aside the Peshawar High Court (PHC) order<\/a> that reinstated \u201cbat\u201d as the party\u2019s electoral symbol for the upcoming general elections.<\/p>\n The verdict means the PTI\u2019s ticket holders would have to contest the elections as independent candidates. The PTI\u2019s bid to join the elections using the PTI-Nazriati splinter group\u2019s symbol, the batsman, also hit a snag after the latter went back on an agreement that would have allowed the PTI candidates to stand in the elections with their symbol.<\/p>\n The verdict was announced a little before the midnight after a marathon hearing that lasted two entire days.<\/p>\n A three-member bench \u2014 comprising the CJP, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Musarrat Hilali \u2014 heard the ECP\u2019s petition challenging the PHC decision to restore the PTI\u2019s election symbol.<\/p>\n Announcing the verdict, the CJP said the ECP \u201chas been calling upon the PTI to hold its intra-party elections since May 24, 2021 and at that time the PTI was in the federal government and in some provinces.\u201d<\/p>\n He added: \u201cTherefore, it cannot be stated that ECP was victimising PTI. Nonetheless we wanted to satisfy ourselves that the ECP had not acted mala fide of ulterior reason or that PTI was discriminated against; it transpired that ECP had passed orders against 13 other registered political parties which were far more severe than the order passed against PTI.\u201d<\/p>\n The order said \u201cone such case of All Pakistan Muslim League came before this court on Jan 12, 2024 and the order of the ECP delisting the said political party was upheld.\u201d<\/p>\n It added that the \u201cECP wanted to ensure that PTI holds intra party elections. The The court noted that 14 PTI members, with stated credentials, had complained to ECP that elections had not been held. \u201cThese complaints were brushed aside in the writ petition by simply asserting that they were not members of PTI and thus not entitled to contest elections, but this bare denial was insufficient, particularly The order mentioned: \u201cIf any member of a political party is expelled it must be done in accordance with section 205 of the Act, but no evidence in this regard was forthcoming.\u201d<\/p>\n The court further observed: \u201cWe also do not agree with the learned judges that the ECP did not have \u2018any jurisdiction to question or adjudicate the intra-party On December 22, the ECP had decided against<\/a> letting PTI retain its electoral symbol for the general elections, saying that it had failed to hold intra-party polls as per its prevailing constitution and election laws.<\/p>\n Subsequently, the PTI approached the PHC against the ECP order on Dec 26 and a single-member bench restored<\/a> the party\u2019s electoral symbol until Jan 9, directing that the case be fixed before a divisional bench.<\/p>\n On Dec 30, the electoral watchdog filed a review application<\/a> in the PHC, arguing that the court had overstepped its jurisdiction. Days later, in a major blow for the PTI, the high court withdrew the stay<\/a> on the ECP order, stripping the party of its symbol again.<\/p>\n Consequently, the PTI moved the Supreme Court against the restoration of the ECP ruling. On Wednesday, the party had withdrawn the appeal as the matter was already being heard by the PHC.<\/p>\n The same day, the PHC had declared<\/a> \u201cillegal\u201d the ECP\u2019s decision to revoke PTI\u2019s iconic \u2018bat\u2019 symbol and reject its intra-party polls. In the short order, the PHC had termed the ECP order as \u201cillegal, without any lawful authority and of no legal effect\u201d.<\/p>\n According to the court, the PTI was entitled to the election symbol \u201cstrictly in terms of sections 215 and 217, read with any other enabling provision of the Elections Act 2017 and Election Rules 2017\u201d.<\/p>\n On Thursday, the ECP had challenged the PHC\u2019s decision to restore the PTI\u2019s election symbol. Simultaneously, the PTI initiated<\/a> legal action in the PHC, filing a contempt petition against Chief Election Commissioner Sikandar Sultan Raja and other ECP members for not implementing the high court\u2019s order in the case.<\/p>\n During the previous hearing yesterday, CJP Isa had observed that democracy was a fundamental right, which should be present in both a country and a political party.<\/p>\n Justice Isa had also highlighted that the case was \u201ctime sensitive\u201d with the Feb 8 general elections approaching, adding that the matter required \u201cimmediate attention\u201d.<\/p>\n ECP counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan had contended that the PTI had held its intra-party polls \u201csecretly\u201d and the elections were not in accordance with the party\u2019s documents. Upon being repeatedly questioned, he also assured the bench that no discriminatory behaviour had been adopted with the party.<\/p>\n PTI\u2019s Barrister Gohar Khan stated that the party would file an appeal against the verdict, and expressed hope for its reversal.<\/p>\n Addressing the media in Islamabad, Gohar mentioned that the withdrawal of the party\u2019s electoral symbol had led to the loss of 227 reserved seats, potentially paving the way for \u201ccorruption.\u201d<\/p>\n He emphasised that none of the 14 petitioners had ever been PTI members, stating, \u201cNone of the 837,950 members has raised objections on party polls.\u201d<\/p>\n Gohar stressed the judiciary\u2019s responsibility to safeguard fundamental rights for everyone, highlighting that if attempts were made to exclude certain parties from the electoral race, the court should look into it.<\/p>\n He added, \u201cWhile we accept the apex court\u2019s decision, we are confident that people will respond to Imran\u2019s call on election day.\u201d<\/p>\n Reacting to the top court\u2019s decision, PTI founding member Akbar S. Babar \u2014who was also among petitioners challenging the PTI\u2019s intra-party elections \u2014 commented that the verdict would establish a new direction. He expressed that his efforts had been focused on enabling all deserving party leaders to rise in ranks, and the court\u2019s decision would facilitate that.<\/p>\n Babar noted that the intra-party elections had now sensitised people, marking the second instance after the foreign funding case where he believed the \u201ctruth\u201d had prevailed.<\/p>\n He mentioned his commitment to following the same path and anticipated that other parties would also be influenced by the verdict.<\/p>\n During today\u2019s hearing, Hamid Khan appeared as the PTI counsel while Makhdoom Ali Khan was present as the ECP lawyer. PTI lawyer Ali Zafar and the party\u2019s chief election commissioner (CEC) Niazullah Niazi were also present in the courtroom.<\/p>\n At the outset of the hearing, CJP Isa said that the detailed order of the PHC restoring the PTI\u2019s symbol has been issued, at which the party counsel termed it an \u201cexcellent decision\u201d.<\/p>\n Hamid then came to the rostrum, noting that today was the last day to submit the party tickets to the ECP so he would try to wrap up his arguments soon. \u201cWe also have less time as we also have to write the order,\u201d the chief justice said indicating that the court would announce its verdict today.<\/p>\n Here, Justice Mazhar noted that there were two questions: whether the court had jurisdiction or not and whether the ECP has the authority to investigate intra-party polls.<\/p>\n Zafar then argued that neither the Constitution nor the Elections Act 2017 granted the electoral watchdog the right to review a party\u2019s intra-party elections.<\/p>\n Citing Article 17 of the Constitution, he asserted that contesting the elections with an electoral symbol was among a political party\u2019s rights and that depriving a party of the same would be in violation of the Constitution.<\/p>\n \u201cThe election commission has discriminated against the PTI. The ECP has apparently been mala fide by taking away the \u2018bat\u2019 symbol,\u201d he alleged, contending that the watchdog was \u201cnot a court that could grant the right to a fair trial\u201d.<\/p>\n Zafar claimed that none of the PTI members had challenged the intra-party polls, asserting that they were held according to the PTI\u2019s constitution.<\/p>\n He highlighted that the ECP had given 20 days to hold the intra-party elections, which the PTI complied with due to the fear of the party being \u201cexcluded from the elections\u201d.<\/p>\n The PTI lawyer said his basic argument was that those challenging the intra-party polls were not party members. He added that the PTI had responded in writing to the ECP\u2019s 32 questions, following which it set aside the intra-party elections.<\/p>\n Zafar contended that the election commission had not mentioned \u201cany irregularity\u201d in its Dec 22 order but said that the \u201creasons given were strange\u201d.<\/p>\n He said that the ECP had said it would not accept the intra-party polls as the appointment of the party CEC was not done correctly. However, he added, that a day ago the ECP counsel had raised technical objections and talked about \u201cdemocracy within the party\u201d.<\/p>\n Here, CJP Isa, reiterating his remarks from yesterday, noted, \u201cThere should be democracy within political parties as well as within the country. The basic question is of democracy, not of complete implementation of the party constitution.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIt should at least be seen that [intra-party] elections were conducted,\u201d he said, adding that Akbar S. Babar was also a party member \u201ceven if disliked\u201d by the party.<\/p>\n At one point during the hearing, Justice Isa told the PTI counsel to either \u201cgive the whole context\u201d for its allegations of mala fide against the ECP or \u201ckeep it (the arguments) legal\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cDid we appoint them? You all appoint these people. We don\u2019t appoint them,\u201d he remarked, adding that the apex court could \u201cforce\u201d the commission to perform its duties but \u201cnot take on their responsibilities\u201d.<\/p>\n The CJP told the PTI counsel: \u201cSubstantiate if you are taking the angle of mala fide.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIf they\u2019re mala fide then we look at them with very suspect eyes or you take away this allegation. I am not saying \u2018take it away\u2019. It\u2019s your call,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n At this, Hamid said he would keep his arguments non-political. When asked if he was withdrawing his allegation of \u201cmala fide in fact\u201d, the lawyer replied he would not \u201cgo into that arena\u201d.<\/p>\n The CJP recalled that the ECP had issued notice to the PTI when the party was in the government.<\/p>\n Justice Mazhar asked whether the PTI had followed the election schedule it had issued. \u201cWere the [intra-party] elections transparent? Was it clear that who could contest the elections and who could not?\u201d he asked.<\/p>\n \u201cYou ask for a level playing field [but] would also have to give your party members the same,\u201d he remarked, noting that the ECP had not taken action on its own but upon receiving complaints. Zafar assured the court that he would respond to all questions.<\/p>\n \u201cNowadays everyone uses the word establishment, the real term is army. We should talk openly and fully,\u201d Justice Isa said, adding that he respects constitutional institutions.<\/p>\n The top judge said: \u201cIf we talk about [General] Ayub\u2019s rule, political parties in Pakistan have a history.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe PPP\u2019s sword symbol was taken from them, after which PPP-Parliamentarian was created. PML-N has seen a similar time,\u201d he remarked, adding that it must be seen who was in the government at the time.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is a big difference between the situation of today and then, when SC judges took oath under the PCO. Today, the PTI\u2019s opponents are not in government,\u201d the CJP said.<\/p>\n Justice Mazhar noted that any irregularities identified by the ECP are from the PTI constitution itself, to which Zafar replied that the ECP has not identified any irregularities in the election schedule and venue.<\/p>\n Here, Justice Isa remarked that the main matter is whether intra-party elections have been conducted or not. He further remarked that if PTI had let Akbar Babar contest the intra-party elections, and he lacked support, he would have lost anyway.<\/p>\n \u201cThe PTI founder is facing a trial in jail; if he comes out of jail tomorrow and wonders who these officials are, then what will happen?\u201d the CJP wondered.<\/p>\n Justice Isa also asked the PTI counsel why he does not have faith in the party\u2019s \u201c850,000 members\u201d, to which Zafar replied that he was pointing out the laws which the ECP used to withdraw the party\u2019s election symbol.<\/p>\n \u201cThe basic point is the authority of the ECP. If that is not present, the rest of the matter will end by itself,\u201d Justice Mazhar said.<\/p>\n \u201cIf the elections were conducted in a regular manner, then the election symbol should be given in any case,\u201d Justice Isa remarked, cautioning not to get involved in the complications of the elections.<\/p>\n \u201cJust tell me whether all party members got an equal opportunity in PTI\u2019s intra-party elections or not,\u201d the CJP stated. \u201cThe ECP cannot be shown a piece of paper and be told that elections were held.\u201d<\/p>\n He added that it has to be seen whether the intra-party elections were conducted according to the prevailing procedure or not.<\/p>\n Zafar said that according to the Elections Act, each party has to issue a certificate within seven days of holding the intra-party polls, at which Justice Hilali observed that the certificate was subject to the election process according to the party constitution.<\/p>\n The PTI lawyer reiterated that the ECP did not have the authority to scrutinise the intra-party polls, to which Justice Mazhar said that the \u201creal issue is of the jurisdiction\u201d.<\/p>\n Here, CJP Isa remarked, \u201cOr you can accept whether you want democracy or not. You cannot say that democracy remains in the house but not outside it.<\/p>\n \u201cYou want politics, not democracy. Politics is democracy,\u201d he noted, asking why the PTI did not allow the 14 people challenging the party polls to contest them.<\/p>\n The top judge pointed out that the PTI lawyer said the ECP could impose a fine for not holding intra-party polls properly but at the same time argued that it did not have authority for other matters.<\/p>\n Here, Justice Hilali wondered if the ECP \u201ccould do nothing\u201d if a political party issued a certificate for holding intra-party elections without actually conducting them. Meanwhile, Justice Mazhar observed that the party had \u201cgone beyond the stage of fine\u201d by holding the intra-party polls.<\/p>\n The CJP then inquired Zafar who the PTI chairman was, to which he replied that it was Barrister Gohar Ali Khan. \u201cBarrister Gohar\u2019s own election has become questionable. If the PTI founder had given a certificate, then it would have been another situation,\u201d the chief justice remarked.<\/p>\n To this, the PTI counsel responded that the certificate needed to be issued by the incumbent party chairman, not the previous one. When Justice Hilali asked who the PTI chairman was at the time of the intra-party polls, the lawyer answered that the position was held by former premier Imran Khan.<\/p>\n Zafar maintained that Babar had been expelled from the PTI. The CJP asked the counsel to show on record that he was not a member, to which Zafar said he would produce the document proving that.<\/p>\n \u201cA certificate can only be issued once a party has held elections in accordance with its constitution,\u201d Justice Hilali noted.<\/p>\n Here, the CJP observed, \u201cThe PTI\u2019s constitution says that the chairman shall be elected every two years while others every three years. Violation of the party constitution is proved to this extent.\u201d<\/p>\n Zafar then said he had been \u201cgiven directives\u201d that Babar was not a PTI member, at which CJP Isa asked who was giving him directives. \u201cI am being given directives by the party leadership,\u201d he answered.<\/p>\n \u201cThose who joined the party two years ago are giving that instruction?\u201d Justice Isa questioned.<\/p>\n Justice Hilali asked Zafar whether PTI had published the nomination papers for its intra-party elections on its website. She wondered how people were supposed to know that these were the nomination papers, as well as when to submit them.<\/p>\n Here, the CJP directed that the PTI\u2019s website be checked for the nomination papers but Zafar informed the court that they had been removed from the website once the intra-party elections had concluded.<\/p>\n Justice Isa then asked Zafar to show any sort of proof that candidates\u2019 fees or nomination papers had been received. The lawyer replied that fees were received in cash, to which Justice Isa questioned which political party collects their fees in cash.<\/p>\n Justice Hilali said, \u201cYour party\u2019s slogan is to empower people but the same cannot be seen here.\u201d Zafar responded that the party had been given 20 days for \u201cwhatever mistakes\u201d they had made.<\/p>\n This is talk from three and a half years ago that the ECP had directed you to hold elections, Justice Isa said. \u201cYour response was that one year was given.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe ECP showed bravery by submitting a notice during the [PTI\u2019s] government,\u201d Justice Isa remarked, to which Zafar replied that the electoral watchdog had issued notices to all political parties and not just the PTI.<\/p>\n Here, Justice Mazhar said that the schedule for the intra-party polls issued by the PTI \u201cseemed practically impossible\u201d. \u201cIf you have to make decisions according to your wishes instead of the law, then I cannot accept them.<\/p>\n \u201cAll political parties should be treated equally. The ECP told us that no objections were raised on other parties\u2019 intra-party polls,\u201d he noted, adding that \u201conly PTI members did not get a level playing field\u201d.<\/p>\n During one of his arguments, Zafar noted that according to the law, it was mandatory for the ECP to issue the certificate of inter-party elections to the PTI.<\/p>\n \u201cThe main thing is to have elections, not certificates,\u201d the CJP responded. \u201cNot having a certificate is not a problem, not having an election is a problem. The certificate can come even without an election.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhy is PTI afraid of elections?\u201d the judge asked.<\/p>\n Justice Isa asked Zafar once again to provide any documents as proof that PTI\u2019s intra-party elections had indeed taken place.<\/p>\n \u201cIf the PTI needed more time, it was said before that the decision [of Peshawar High Court] will have to be suspended,\u201d Justice Isa said,<\/p>\n The CJP also asked Zafar to provide Imran\u2019s nomination letter in favour of Barrister Gohar, to which he was told that there was no such letter and the decision was simply announced in the media.<\/p>\n \u201cIf Imran Khan says tomorrow he did not give this nomination, then what will happen?\u201d the judge wondered.<\/p>\n In an interaction with PTI\u2019s Niazi, Justice Isa remarked that the inclusion of new people in the party creates suspicion that influential people had taken over the party.<\/p>\n \u201cYou are insulting me,\u201d Niazi replied, accusing Justice Isa of asking him PTI-related question even during his son\u2019s interview to obtain license to practice as a lawyer. \u201cI have been appearing before you for the past three years. I know why this is happening to me.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIf you want to maintain this attitude, we won\u2019t even hear the case. If you want to tarnish the reputation of institutions by blaming them, go ahead and do it,\u201d the CJP remarked, forcing Zafar to intervene and apologise on Niazi\u2019s behalf.<\/p>\n Zafar, continuing his arguments, said that the PTI wanted the intra-party polls to be held in Islamabad but no one was willing to give their place for the polls.<\/p>\n Here, Justice Hilali asked if PTI had an office where the polls were held, to which Zafar replied saying that the ground at which the polls were held was right next to the party\u2019s office.<\/p>\n Justice Mazhar asked if the details of the location of the intra-party polls were shared with the ECP.<\/p>\n PTI counsel replied that the ECP letter was not responded to, however, the police were alerted about it. \u201cThe location of the polling location was also disclosed through the media.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhen Akbar S Babar came, the polling time had already ended,\u201d Barrister Zafar said. \u201cWe wouldn\u2019t have had any reservations if he wanted to contest the elections.\u201d<\/p>\n The ECP\u2019s petition, submitted by former attorney general Makhdoom Ali Khan, argued that the PHC should not have proceeded with the case without first issuing a notice to the attorney general for Pakistan (AGP).<\/p>\n This procedural step was necessary because the legal question at hand pertained to the federal government, involving the interpretation of Article 17 of the Constitution and its relationship with the provisions of the Elections Act of 2017, it said.<\/p>\n The petition also highlighted that the PHC\u2019s order conflicted with previous Supreme Court rulings, which have consistently discouraged high courts from intervening in the electoral process, which, as per the Constitution, was exclusively within the ECP\u2019s jurisdiction.<\/p>\n The petition emphasised that the high court\u2019s judgement effectively nullified key sections of the Elections Act and Election Rules by restricting the ECP\u2019s constitutional and statutory roles in regulating and supervising intra-party elections of political parties. This interpretation contradicted the principles established in previous superior court rulings, it said.<\/p>\n Furthermore, it undermined the fundamental purpose of Section 215(5) of the Act, in conjunction with Rules 157 and 158, which aim to foster democracy, pluralism, and transparency within political parties by ensuring timely intra-party elections, it added.<\/p>\n Additionally, the PHC ruling disregarded the essence of Section 208(2) of the Elections Act, which is intended to guarantee equal opportunities for all party members to contest elections for any political party office.<\/p>\n It said the high court order not only rendered relevant provisions practically redundant but also enabled a political party to undertake \u201csham\u201d intra-party elections without any checks and balances. This, the ECP\u2019s petition said, was not only contrary to Article 17 of the Constitution but was also in conflict with the principles of democracy.<\/p>\n The petition also pointed out that the PHC\u2019s order overlooked the fact that the Elections Act was enacted under a democratic government and led to the repeal of various election laws, some of which were established during times of extra-constitutional rule.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In a massive blow to PTI, the Supreme Court on Saturday set aside the Peshawar High Court (PHC) order that reinstated \u201cbat\u201d as the party\u2019s electoral symbol for the upcoming general elections. The verdict means the PTI\u2019s ticket holders would have to contest the elections as independent candidates. The PTI\u2019s bid to join the elections […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":47536,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/i.dawn.com\/large\/2024\/01\/132346035701c87.jpg?r=234712","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[192],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-47535","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-islamabad-news"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47535","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=47535"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47535\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/47536"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=47535"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=47535"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pakistaninewspaperlist.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=47535"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nmere production of a certificate stating that such elections were held would not suffice to establish that intra party elections had been held when a challenge was thrown to such an assertion. Nor, in our opinion, should ECP concern itself with minor irregularities in the holding of a political party\u2019s elections. However, in the instant case not even prima facie evidence was produced to show that a semblance of elections had been held.\u201d<\/p>\n
\nwhen they had credibly established their long association with PTI.\u201d<\/p>\n
\nelections of a political party.\u2019 If such an interpretation is accepted it would render all provisions in the Act requiring the holding of intra party elections illusory and of no consequence and be redundant.\u201d<\/p>\nPTI to file review appeal against SC decision: Gohar<\/h2>\n
Verdict will affect other parties too: Akbar S. Babar<\/h2>\n
The hearing<\/h2>\n
PTI insists party\u2019s intra-party polls were legitimate<\/h2>\n
CJP asks PTI to share \u2018whole context\u2019 of allegations against ECP<\/h2>\n
\u2018Barrister Gohar\u2019s own election has become questionable\u2019<\/h2>\n
\u201cWhy is PTI afraid of elections?\u201d asks CJP<\/h2>\n
ECP petition<\/h2>\n