The Peshawar High Court dashed the hopes of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf on Thursday in a case pertaining to the petitions against the intra-party elections and the allotment of election symbol, as it ordered the country’s top electoral authority to announce the decision before December 22 (tomorrow).

The court deemed it appropriated that since the since, the Election Commission of Pakistan has heard the case in detail, so it should issue a decision, said the short order. Earlier, the court had reserved its decision on the petitions.

A two-judge bench of the court comprising Justice Attique Shah and Justice Sahibzada Asadullah resumed the hearing on Thursday, two days after the court barred the polls overseer from taking action against the former ruling party.

On the same basis, the court disposed of the case and ordered the ECP to release the decision of the case before Dec 22.

It merits here to mention that a five-member bench of the ECP reserved its decision on December 18 on the pleas against the PTI’s intra-party elections. As many as 13 petitions have been filed against the party’s intra-party polls whereas the Hum Awam Pakistan Party has filed a plea in the ECP for the symbol of bat.

Last week, the PHC had stopped the polls overseer from issuing final orders in a petition challenging the PTI’s intra-party polls.

The polls overseer is set to allot election symbols on Friday. During the hearing, PTI lawyer Khan informed the court if any decision was not given by Friday then his party candidates would be considered independent.

Hearing

Barrister Gohar Ali Khan, who is also the PTI chairman, and ECP lawyer appeared in court.

At the hearing, Khan informed the court that the ECP did not tell the reasons for not allotting the election symbol. To this, the court wondered whether it can issue any order from Peshawar as the ECP was situated in the federal capital. The court further asked the PTI lawyer why he did not approach the Islamabad High Court, which is also functioning.

To this, Barrister Gohar replied that the announcement for PTI’s intra-party election was made from Peshawar and added that they better understand facilities in KP than Punjab.

Justice Shah reminded Gohar that he was the chairman of a party and asked how he can make such statements. He told the PTI lawyer that he can make such statements in rallies but not in court.

The court had adjourned the hearing and decided to hear it after a break.

When the case resumed, the PTI chief started presenting his arguments. Gohar stated that the ECP did not just send a notice to a major party, adding that his party’s provincial cabinet was also issued the notice.

Gohar informed the court that the party did not approach the Islamabad High Court as it feared arrest of party leaders. He added that if the decision was not received by Friday, then his party’s candidates would be considered as independents.

He added that the procedure of intra-party elections has to be decided by the party itself. If the intra-party elections were not recognised then the election symbol would not be received, he added.

Gohar claimed that the ECP has been delaying the matters. He wondered whether or not 32 questions were asked to any other party.

Justice Ahmed asked Gohar that was he of the view that the ECP should decide on the complaints itself?

Justice Shah asked who made the intra-party elections controversial? To this, the ECP lawyer replied that petitions against intra-party elections were submitted.

Justice Shah inquired that the people who gave the applications were part of PTI?

The ECP lawyer replied that petitioners have not attached letters and they have challenged the non-publication of the election results. The results would be published only when a final decision was taken.

He added that the ECP has reserved the decision in the case and they can again challenge the decision of the commission.

On this, Barrister Gohar urged the court to issue an order soon as tomorrow (Friday) is the last day for election symbol.

After the completion of arguments from both sides, the court had reserved its decision.