Reserved seats against proportional representation not permissible, remarks Justice Ayesha
Pakistan
Justice Minallah says the apex court would regret its decision once again in future
ISLAMABAD (Dunya News) – As the Supreme Court on Tuesday resumed the hearing on the petition filed by the Sunni Ittehad Council against the denial of reserved seats for women and minorities in the national and provincial assemblies, Justice Ayesha A. Malik remarked that the reserved seats cannot be allotted contrary to the principle of proportional representation.
A full court bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, is conducting the proceedings.
Other judges on the bench are Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Ayesha A. Malik, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Syed Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Shahid Waheed, Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan.
During the proceedings, Justice Ayesha Malik commented that allocating reserved seats against the principle of proportional representation was not permissible. She also questioned the advantages other parties would gain if the SIC lost this case.
Justice Minallah interjected at one point, emphasising the importance of women and minorities having representation in parliament. He noted that the PML-N and PPP faced similar issues in the past without support from the Supreme Court.
"This mirrors the situation from 2018 where one party is the aggrieved party. The court has not learned from past instances," Justice Minallah added.
The judge predicted that there would inevitably come a time in the future when the apex court would regret its decision once again.
PREVIOUS HEARING
On previous hearing on Jan 24 [Monday], CJP Qazi Faez Isa referred to the PTI’s merger with the SIC a political “suicide”.
Following the Feb 8 general elections, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, which had been stripped of its electoral symbol ‘bat’, had directed the independent candidates who won election with its backing to join the Sunni Ittehad Council under a merger.
The chief justice asked the lawyer that the court would not hear any excuse painting the Election Commission as an abuser of the PTI.
“We are here to listen to what is in accordance with the constitution and law. You are the lawyer of the Sunni Ittehad Council, and not of the PTI. Your arguments in favour of the PTI come in conflict of interest,” added Justice Isa.
BACKGROUND
In March, the ECP ruled that the SIC was not entitled to claim quota for reserved seats “due to having non-curable legal defects and violation of a mandatory provision of submission of party list for reserved seats”.
Later, the ECP accepted applications of the opposing parties and decided that the seats in the National Assembly and provincial assemblies would not remain vacant and would be allocated by a proportional representation process on the basis of seats won by political parties.
The development resulted in the PTI-backed SIC losing a total of 77 reserved seats - 23 National Assembly seats (20 women and 3 minorities), 25 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly seats (21 women and 4 minorities), two Sindh Assembly seats (women) and 27 Punjab Assembly seats (24 women and 3 minority).
The PTI dismissed the ECP verdict as unconstitutional.
The SIC then challenged the ECP ruling in the Peshawar High Court, but its plea was dismissed.
In May, a three-judge bench of the apex court took up a petition filed by the SIC. The court suspended the ECP decision to allocate SIC's reserved seats to other parties.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, during the proceedings, remarked that the mandate given by the people should be properly represented in parliament.
The court sent the matter of reserved seats to the Judges Committee to decide whether the case would be heard by the same bench or a larger bench would be constituted.
The court also ordered the ECP to suspended victory notifications of 77 lawmakers [on reserved seats], causing the ruling coalition to lose its two-thirds majority in the National Assembly.
In late May, a full court was constituted to hear the case.
