Justice Jamal Mandukhel questioned whether the Election Commission’s decisions were constitutionally sound, urging a focus beyond their statements.
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has reserved its decision regarding the case of specific seats for the Sunni Ittehad Council. The full court hearing, presided over by Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa, involved a panel of esteemed justices deliberating on the matter.
At the outset, Faisal Siddiqui, representing the Sunni Ittehad Council, argued that the Election Commission failed to fulfill its responsibilities, drawing parallels with the Balochistan Awami Party’s controversial allocation of seats in 2018. He contended that the Election Commission’s dishonest responses and denial of their own documents raised questions about their integrity.
Justice Jamal Mandukhel questioned whether the Election Commission’s decisions were constitutionally sound, urging a focus beyond their statements. Justice Athar Minullah and Justice Irfan Saadat further interrogated the legitimacy of the Election Commission’s actions and the participation of the Balochistan Awami Party in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa elections.
Justice Jamal Mandukhel highlighted the distinction between political and parliamentary parties, stating that parliamentary decisions aren’t necessarily bound by political party directives. He humorously remarked on the name “Father Party,” eliciting laughter in the courtroom.
Chief Justice Isa questioned the credibility of the 2018 elections and the Election Commission’s conduct. He challenged Siddiqui to substantiate claims of discrimination and unfair practices by the Election Commission.
More From FactFile: Shehbaz led-govt to hold in-camera briefing on Operation ‘Azm-e-Istehkam’
The court examined the Sunni Ittehad Council’s membership policies and JUI(F)’s allocation of minority seats, with Siddiqui arguing against disproportionate representation and the inclusion of independent members.
Chief Justice Isa concluded by questioning how the Sunni Ittehad Council could claim specific seats without winning general ones, suggesting Siddiqui’s arguments were self-defeating. The court reserved its decision, leaving the matter pending further review.
