In a significant 70-page judgment authored by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, the Supreme Court of Pakistan declared the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) decision on reserved seats unconstitutional. The court annulled a previous ruling by the Peshawar High Court (PHC), confirming that reserved seats should rightfully be allocated to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). The verdict was passed by an 8-5 majority of the full bench, led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa. Justices Yahya Afridi, Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail, and Naeem Akhtar Afghan dissented, arguing for the importance of proportional representation.
Role of the Election Commission
The judgment emphasized that the Election Commission is not merely an administrative entity but a “guarantor institution” of democratic processes. Justice Shah noted that the Commission must recognize its critical role in ensuring free and fair elections, serving as a pillar of democracy. He added that the Commission’s failure to uphold this role during the 2024 General Elections led to the need for judicial intervention.
“We find it important to emphasize that the Commission, as a constitutional ‘electoral management body,’ is not merely an administrative entity but a fundamental ‘guarantor institution’ of democratic processes,” the verdict stated. It further emphasized that the ECP must function to ensure the transparency and fairness of elections to maintain public trust in the electoral system.
Election Commission’s Role as a Primary Contesting Party
The judgment took issue with how the Election Commission contested the case, stating that the Commission acted as a primary contesting party against PTI and SIC instead of facilitating an impartial adjudication of the disputes. The majority opinion reiterated that while the ECP performs some quasi-judicial functions, it should not act as an aggrieved party when its decisions are overturned by a higher judicial forum.
Electoral Justice and Integrity
Justice Shah emphasized that election disputes are not mere civil matters but involve substantial public interest. Election cases, he explained, aim to ensure that elected representatives are qualified and elected fairly, without corrupt practices. The Supreme Court stressed that electoral justice is vital for protecting political and electoral rights, and the court has a responsibility to ensure electoral integrity to maintain the legitimacy of democracy.
“Electoral justice is vital to protecting political and electoral rights and is intertwined with electoral integrity,” the judgment read. It further added that denying electoral justice and compromising electoral integrity would undermine democracy’s very legitimacy.
Freedom of Expression and Political Participation
The judgment also touched on the constitutional guarantees provided under Articles 17(2) and 19, which protect the right to form political parties and freedom of expression, respectively. These rights are essential for a representative democracy, where citizens’ voices and choices are reflected in their political leaders. The court warned against the Commission’s actions that potentially impacted these fundamental rights, particularly in relation to PTI’s intra-party elections.
The Supreme Court concluded that the ECP’s decision to disqualify PTI from obtaining its election symbol had far-reaching implications that could have been avoided had the Commission and the Court clarified the legal position earlier.
Reservations on ECP’s Discretion
The judgment raised doubts about the Election Commission’s power to reject intra-party election certificates and whether its discretion in the PTI case was exercised justly. The court held back from giving a definitive view on these questions, as they are pending in a review petition filed by PTI.
Justice Shah concluded by urging the ECP to act impartially in all future electoral matters and ensure that its decisions do not interfere with the democratic rights of political parties and voters.
