ISLAMABAD -UNS: The Supreme Court has fixed for Monday (May 15) the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) plea asking the top court to revisit its order of holding elections to the Punjab Assembly on May 14.
The petition will be heard a day after the court-ordered election deadline lapses.
A three-member bench, comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial and Justices Ijazul Ahsan and Munib Akhtar will take up the plea next week — the same bench that had issued the order for elections in Punjab.
In a unanimous judgment on April 4, the bench had quashed the electoral body’s decision to extend the date for polls in the province from April 10 to Oct 8 and fixed May 14 as the new date.
It had also directed the government to release Rs21 billion for the elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and provide a security plan to the ECP regarding the polls. Moreover, the court had instructed relevant authorities to keep it in the loop.
However, in reports submitted to the apex court in subsequent days, the ECP had said the ruling coalition was reluctant in releasing the funds.
It had contended that staggering polls by holding them in Punjab and KP separately, before elsewhere, was not feasible since it would incur significantly more expenses compared to holding the exercise on one day. It had further said that an already depleted security apparatus would require weeks in advance for its mobilisation.
On May 3, with fewer than two weeks to the May 14 election date ordered by the court, the election commission had filed its plea seeking a review of the court’s April 4 order.
The review petition, filed through Advocate Sajeel Shehryar Swati, was submitted a day after the government and PTI developed a consensus on holding elections across the country on the same day. Both parties, however, had failed to agree on a date for the elections.
ECP’s plea
In its plea, the ECP said changing the election programme was the solitary domain of the commission under Section 58 of the Elections Act 2017.
It asked the court to take back its April 4 judgement “in the interest of justice”, emphasising that Article 254 should be used to stultify the constitutional imperative of holding the elections within 90 days, but the apex court should also look at the ground realities. The provision suggested that failure to comply with requirements as to time does not render an act invalid.
