ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday maintained the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP’s) verdict regarding re-election at five polling stations of Tehsil Lakki Marwat.
A three-member bench comprising Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed heard the case against re-polling at five polling stations on the Chairman’s seat in Lakki Marwat Tehsil.
The Supreme Court rejected the appeal against the decision of the Election Commission.
During the course of proceedings, the Supreme Court expressed annoyance over the Election Commission’s failure to formulate rules for hearing cases.
The bench observed that decades had passed since the Election Commission got quasi-judicial powers and failure to make rules even after many years was a clear failure of the ECP.
The bench said that the Election Commission should prepare and publish its rules as soon as possible in accordance with the law. The Election Commission had wide powers to interfere in polling and results, it added.
The Election Commission also submitted report regarding re-election on court orders.
Advocate Latif Khosa counsel for petitioner Azizullah, candidate of Jamaat-e-Islami, said that the turnout in the constituency was 30.6%. The winning candidate Azizullah had obtained 16, 696 votes while the JUI candidate secured 16, 145 votes, he added.
He said that all parties would unite against his client during the re-poll. The killings in the constituency on polling day were far from the polling stations, he added.
He said that according to such step of ECP there should be re-polling in all constituencies.
Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that the Election Commission had special powers to order the opening of certain constituencies or polling stations.
Justice Munib Akhtar said that the Election Commission was exceeding its limits by using the powers of Article 9 of the Election Act.
Justice Bandial said that the ECP had powers to announce re-polling in any constituencies in 60 days.
He said that the court did not want to narrate strict thing which affect the jurisdiction of ECP.