Election Commission challenges Supreme Court’s clarification on reserved seats

The Election Commission has challenged the Supreme Court’s clarification on reserved seats issued by the majority judges on September 14, asserting that the constitution cannot be rewritten under the guise of interpretation.

According to media, the Election Commission stated in its review petition that it is not responsible for the delay in the court’s decision.

It filed a clarification request on July 12, and the Supreme Court issued a clarification order on September 14.

The petitioners argued that the court did not issue a notice to the Election Commission regarding the documents submitted by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and did not seek a response from the Election Commission on those documents.

Following the Election Commission’s clarification request, the Parliament enacted legislation.

The Election Commission requested the Supreme Court to reconsider the clarification issued on September 14.

Additional Requests Submitted to the Supreme Court by the Election Commission

In the review case, the Election Commission also submitted additional requests to the Supreme Court, including a plea to stay the implementation of the decision.

The petition urged the court to issue a stay order on the judicial decision until a verdict is reached on the review.

The Election Commission stated that the constitution cannot be rewritten under the pretext of interpretation, asserting that the court deviated from its July 12 orders in its detailed decision.

The detailed decision restricted 41 members to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

In its additional requests, the Election Commission mentioned that independent members have a three-day window to join a political party, but the Supreme Court extended this to 15 days, thereby altering the constitutional language.

Independent members submitted affidavits joining the Sunni Ittehad Council, but the court’s decision completely disregarded these affidavits.

According to the Election Commission, candidates did not submit declarations of party affiliation under Section 66, and the rules pertain to political parties with electoral symbols.

The documents submitted by PTI in the judges’ chambers were never presented in open court, and therefore, PTI cannot be granted relief concerning reserved seats.

PTI has also not claimed its rights in any forum, thus the Supreme Court’s full court decision states that relief cannot be granted to a party that is not a participant.