Minister of Information Shibli Faraz. SCREENSHOT/FILE
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Shibli Faraz’s plea to suspend the schedule of Senate elections on his vacant seat, saying it would not interfere in the electoral process.
Earlier, a Special Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) in Faisalabad had sentenced PTI’s Faraz and Omar Ayub to 10 years in prison each for their alleged role in the May 9, 2023 riots.
Following their conviction, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) disqualified Faraz as Leader of Opposition in the Senate and Ayub as Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly.
Both later challenged their disqualification in the Peshawar High Court (PHC), but their appeals were dismissed as “not maintainable” since they had not surrendered before the court. They then approached the apex court to challenge the ECP’s decision.
On Wednesday, a five-member constitutional bench headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan heard the petition.
During the proceedings, lawyer Gohar Ali Khan, president of PTI, argued that the election for Faraz’s seat was scheduled for Thursday (today), asking the court to suspend the poll schedule until the issue of his disqualification is decided.
Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi asked Gohar why he was seeking a stay order when he had already nominated a candidate for the Senate elections.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail observed that nomination of a candidate was an obligation, while Justice Rizvi further observed that lawyer Gohar himself was the party president and hence should not seek such an order after fielding a candidate. “How many seats will be elected tomorrow?” » asked the judge. Gohar replied, “just one.”
The PTI lawyer further said that they had been “disgraced and removed from two constitutional offices” and requested the court to issue an order to suspend the election calendar and stop the polling.
Additional Attorney General (AAG) Aamir Rehman informed the court that the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Assembly Speaker, who was a party in the PHC case, had not been made a respondent in the Supreme Court proceedings. He added that under the law, surrender to authorities was a prerequisite for seeking redress.
Justice MuhammadAli Mazhar questioned whether the PHC had ruled on whether the case should be upheld, to which lawyer Gohar replied that the court had not yet dismissed it.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail remarked that the court could not take any action in the matter at this stage.
