The Supreme Court discussed the eligibility of convicts to run in elections after serving their sentences during a hearing on the disqualification period under Article 62 One F.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that courts have the authority to issue a declaration, citing a 2017 Supreme Court ruling allowing declarations when facts are admitted. However, the Chief Justice questioned the Court’s right to issue such declarations directly and whether it can exercise the power of a Court of Law under Article 621F. The discussion also extended to whether Election Tribunals could impose a lifetime disqualification, for reasons such as unpaid electricity bills or bank defaults. The precedent for lifetime disqualification was cited in the Tusmeeullah Baloch case, prompting deliberation on whether this rule aligns with the chance for repentance and returning to the right path, as advocated in Islamic teachings.
Additionally, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah highlighted a discrepancy in the eligibility criteria: individuals involved in serious crimes could potentially contest elections after serving their sentences, as both articles pertaining to eligibility apply before elections. This raised questions about how those facing charges of treason, excess, or murder might be eligible while others could face lifelong disqualification for minor infractions.