The Pakistan Electoral Commission (ECP) on Tuesday maintained its ruling in a referendum seeking the enforcement of the 25-contested PTI MPAs, which voted for Hamza Shehbaz ‘PML-N in the Punjab prime minister’s election.
Last month, Hamza was elected prime minister of Punjab, defeating PTI-PML-Q co-candidate Chaudhry Parvez Elahi. Hamza received 1977 votes, including 25 of the PTI rebels. Elahi did not receive any votes as PTI and PML-Q lawmakers withdrew from the session.
Then, following the PTI declaration, Elahi, who is also the speaker of the Punjab Assembly, sent a referendum against the opposition MPPs to the ECP, urging them to withdraw the seats of these legislators by deviating from the PTI by casting their votes in the ECP. grace by breaking group instructions.
Opposition lawmakers are Raja Sagheer Ahmed, Malik Ghulam Rasool Sangha, Saeed Akbar Khan, Mohammad Ajmal, Abdul Aleem Khan, Nazir Ahmed Chohan, Mohammad Amin Zulqernain, Malik Nauman Langrial, Mohammad Salman, Zawar Hussain Warraich, Fida Hussain Ahmed Zahra Batool, Mohammad , Aisha Nawaz, Sajida Yousaf, Haroon Imran Gill, Uzma Kardar, Malik Asad Ali, Ijaz Masih, Mohammad Sabtain Raza, Mohsin Atta Khan Khosa, Mian Khalid Mehmood, Mehar Mohammad Aslam and Faisal Hayat.
The 25 MPAs mentioned in the referendum were issued by PTI but voted for Hamza, Elahi’s referendum said. Subsequently, opposing MPPAs were issued stating the reasons for stating their position but they did not respond, he added.
During today’s hearing, Khalid Ishaq, who represented 10 MPAs, said lawmakers had not received an invitation or an agenda for the April 1 parliamentary party meeting. In addition, only two lawmakers received notices on April 7, he said.
Opposing lawmakers did not receive a notice of disqualification sent on April 18, he said, saying his clients had not been given a chance to show their status.
“The decision of the parliamentary party is nowhere to be found,” he told the court. “A false document has been drafted after the parliamentary session. [Former prime minister] Imran Khan jokes with members of the ECP every day.
“[PTI’s counsel] Ali Zafar rightly said that falling down is cancer [but] dictatorship is a cancer as well. “
Ishaq argued that even if the instructions of party chairman Imran were “correct”, the MPAs could not be issued.
Legislators have been instructed to vote for Elahi and not to be present on polling day, he said. He added that MPAs were free to vote independently if Elahi allocated votes.
“Nowhere has the party chairman issued a directive not to vote for an opposition candidate in the event of a rejection.
Similar interviews were conducted by Javed Malik, an MP for opposition MP Aisha Nawaz.
“A vote of no confidence in Elila was awaited [disqualification] reference without it? “
Meanwhile, PTI adviser Barrister Ali Zafar said it was alleged that the parliamentary party had not issued any instructions.
Article 63-A only mentions a parliamentary party, but does not elaborate on it, ”he said. “The master of the party or the majority of the members may decide.”
Zafar disputed the argument that the opposition MPAs were not barred from voting against the opposition candidate.
“On April 1, all MPAs were given instructions on Elahi,” he said. “The main convener of the Punjab Conference also wrote a letter informing MPAs. Imran Khan had written on Twitter about the decision read by millions of people.”
The prime minister’s election did not take place on April 3, he recalled. “On April 4, PTI general secretary Asad Umar informed members by letter,” he said, adding that even members of the opposition went to a private hotel where PML-N’s Hamza was elected as the CM in a comedy session.
Zafar added that you have submitted courier service receipts as proof.
However, Advocate Salman Akram Raja, who represented Aleem Khan objected, explaining that more documents could not be submitted at this stage.
Subsequently, the ECP did not allow the PTI to import those receipts.
Meanwhile, Zafar went on to say that the PTI provided many opportunities for opposition MPAs to justify their actions but none of them responded to the notice of cause.
“In their written responses [submitted to the ECP]they have agreed to resign, ”he said, adding that the purpose of the ECP debate was to remove any shortcomings in the party chairman’s declaration.
Thereafter, the ECP maintained its verdict after the conclusion of the negotiations. He is expected to announce his decision today or tomorrow (Wednesday).
Dismissal of references against MNAs
Last week, the ECP had dismissed the PTI declarations against 20 MNA objections, stating that they did not comply with Article 63-A.
The matter first came to light in March after several PTI lawmakers were found living in Sindh House in Islamabad ahead of a vote of no confidence in former Imran Khan, some of whom have spoken to the media about their grievances with the organization.
They have denied allegations that they were given money to make the opposition’s no-confidence motion a success but said they would vote “according to their conscience”.
Subsequently, the PTI has filed declarations and references against 20 members of the National Assembly, seeking their disqualification under Article 63-A of the Constitution.
In the end, the votes of the opposition MNAs were not required for the removal of Imran, as the opposition party was able to mobilize support from the political parties working with the government.
After Imran Khan was ousted as prime minister on the night of April 9, his protests against the opposition PTI MNAs were sent to the ECP on April 14 by the acting NA spokesman.
In terms of Article 63-A of the Constitution, parliament may be barred on the grounds of treason if “a vote or refusal to vote in the House against any directive issued by a parliamentary party, in relation to an election of Parliament; the prime minister or prime minister; the draft Constitution (amendment).
The article states that the head of the group must declare in writing that the relevant MNA has deviated but before issuing the declaration, the party head will “give such a member an opportunity to show why the declaration may not be made to him”.
After giving the member the opportunity to state their reasons, the party leader will forward the notice to the speaker, who will forward it to the Chief Electoral Commissioner (CEC). The CEC will have 30 days to verify the declaration. If approved by the CEC, a member “shall cease to be a member of the House and his or her seat shall be vacant”.
According to the Article, any party who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Electoral Commission may lodge an appeal with the High Court within a month. The High Court has 90 days to decide the matter.