ISLAMABAD The hail of the case related to the specific seats of the Sunni Unity Council is going on, the 13- member full court headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa is hearing.
Faisal Siddiqui, counsel for the Sunni Ittehad Council, opened the arguments by saying that history I was asked to give some introductory legal questions. The court said that the full data of the case should be presented first.
]Faisal Siddiqui said that Justice Jamal Mandukhel’s question history was why PTI didn’t dispute the election as a party, Salman Akram Raja had applied for the same which wasn’t approved, there’s no contradiction that the Sunni Unity Council didn’t dispute the election., that’s why the Sunni Ittehad Council didn’t submit the list before for the specific seats.
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa instructed to repeat this formerly, to which Faisal Siddiqui said that yes, there’s no disagreement in this, the Sunni Unity Council didn’t dispute the election. The Chief Justice remarked that why are you talking about the contestation, just didn’t dispute the election anywhere, full stop.
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa proscribed counsel Faisal Siddiqui from calling him Lordship, saying that there’s no need to call Lordship, time can be saved.
The counsel Sunni Ittehad Council said that according to the constitution independent campaigners can join the political party within three days.
The list wasn’t submitted, other parties approached the Election Commission to get the specific seats of the Sunni Ittehad Council, the operation of the Sunni Ittehad for the specific seats was rejected for not querying the choices and not submitting the list, the Election Commission distributed all the seats to other parties.
No decision has been given on the request of the government parties to declare the joining of the Sunni coalition invalid. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that it was honored as a administrative party while accepting the addition of the Sunni Unity Council as valid. The Chief Justice inquired whether there’s a difference between a administrative party and a political party. Faisal Siddiqui replied that each political party has a separate administrative party.
The Chief Justice asked whether political parties and administrative parties have been written independently in the constitution. Faisal Siddiqui said that composition 63 A mentions the administrative party, the party which doesn’t have any seat in the assembly will be a political party and not a administrative party.
There’s a distinction between a political party and a administrative party. The Chief Justice inquired whether the Constitution recognizes this distinction. Faisal Siddiqui said that Composition G63A exists. Chief Justice asked what were you before February 8? Faisal Siddiqui replied that before February 8 we were a political party and after the joining of independent campaigners we came a administrative party. The Chief Justice remarked that hereafter the Sunni Unity Council and the PTI could also stand against each other. Faisal Siddiqui said that it isn’t related to the matter before the court, Sunni Ittehad Council is both a political and a administrative party.
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa asked Faisal Siddiqui that who’s your administrative leader? Faisal Siddiqui replied that I’ll tell you now about the head but it isn’t important in the court, to which the Chief Justice said that you don’t know the name of your head, you’re the supplicant. The Chief Justice inquired whether there’s any election for the administrative head. How to know who’s the administrative head? Faisal Siddiqui said that the administrative chief isn’t related to the case, so he didn’t prepare in this regard. Chief Justice Qazi Faiz while talking to Faisal Siddiqui said that I’ve deleted the political word from your questions. Justice Athar Manullah inquired whether it’s possible to have a administrative party without being a political party. Whichever party is in the assembly will be the administrative party. Justice Jamal Mandukhel said that an independent seeker is one who isn’t associated with any political party. Justice Muneeb Akhtar said in his reflections that if someone declares himself as a party seeker in the nomination papers and submits the ticket, he’ll be considered as a seeker of the Jamaat. Those who have declared themselves as PTI campaigners in nomination papers, the papers were accepted as PTI campaigners and people were tagged, how can the Election Commission’s rules declare PTI campaigners as independent? Whether the election symbol is the same or not is a separate debate, but the campaigners will be the imagination of the party itself. Justice Jamal Mandukhel said that this is what I’ve been trying to explain since history. The Chief Justice remarked that according to this computation, the successful people of PTI joined the Sunni alliance, only independent campaigners can join the party. Justice Ayesha Malik said that on what base did the Election Commission declare the campaigners independent? The Election Commission allowed the campaigners to dispute the choices by feting them as independent. Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that depriving the political party of the electoral symbol was the cause of all this contestation, the Supreme Court had upheld the decision to withdraw the electoral symbol. Justice Jamal Mandukhel said that opinions in congress are made by the administrative party and everyone is bound to observe its opinions, the administrative party isn’t fairly bound to observe the words of the party leader. Justice Muneeb Akhtar said in his reflections that the political party is mentioned in Composition 51 and not the administrative party, Composition 51 and the specific seats are a matter before taking pledge. Doing so is inapplicable at this point, it would be applicable to concentrate on the political party and the case itself. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said that there wasn’t a club case before the court, but aninter-party election case before the court. Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that the election symbol problem was created by the Election Commission itself, the Election Commission resolved the problem by declaring the campaigners free. The Chief Justice remarked that the political party didn’t get the symbol as there were nointra-party choices. Did any seeker apply for the club symbol? Faisal Siddiqui said that the order was also challenged on the rejection of the operation submitted to the Election Commission. Justice Athar Manullah said in his reflections that the election symbol is only for the convenience of the political party, indeed without the election symbol, the political party can dispute the election as a party. Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that the Supreme Court’s decision came before the allotment of election symbols, the whole series of legal crimes started from then. Faisal Siddiqui argued that Salman Akram Raja had approached to declare himself a PTI seeker, but the Election Commission had rejected Salman Akram Raja’s request. Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that if every seeker was a PTI seeker on the ballot paper, it would be a violation of the Supreme Court decision. Justice Ayesha Malik said that the electoral symbol reserved for a political party can not be given to any other seeker. Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi said that the batman was also a symbol of a political party that wanted to take PTI, what happed to the party with the batman? Lawyer Faisal Siddiqui said that the junction with the fur party was terminated. The Chief Justice inquired whether it’s written in the Supreme Court decision that the mark of the club can not be distributed to anyone differently. Faisal Siddiqui said that nothing like this was written in the court decision. Chief Justice said that thank you veritably much. Justice Muneeb Akhtar asked whether the Supreme Court demanded to say so. Faisal Siddiqui replied that there was no need to tell the Supreme Court because the mark can not be set up by anyone differently. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said that the case in the Supreme Court wasn’t about the electoral symbol but about theintra-party choices. The Chief Justice remarked that veritably strong arguments were being minced out. Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel said whether the club sign was removed after the Supreme Court decision or not. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said that according to Justice Muneeb, the campaigners queried the election as PTI campaigners despite the end of the club symbol. Faisal Siddiqui said that this is what we wanted to do, but the Election Commission stopped it. The Chief Justice remarked that we wanted to do what it means? Lawyer Siddiqui said that I’m representing every member of the Sunni Ittehad Council. The Chief Justice remarked that there may be disagreement hereafter, they’re our members and this is our problem, Faisal Siddiqui, you members wanted to prove themselves as Tehreek-e-Insaaf members, the law says to hold party choices moreover. Say do not follow the law, we gave you advice during the case too which wasn’t followed, when you gave the name of Tehreek-e-Insaaf seeker in the nomination papers.
