Supreme Court issues notices to Imran, others in ECP contempt petition

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notices to former prime minister and Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan, Secretary General Asad Umer and Fawad Chaudhry in the petition of Election Commission of Pakistan seeking consolidation of all the petitions of PTI against its contempt notices.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Umer Ata Banidal and comprising Justice Ayesha A Malik and Justice Athar Minallah, held the preliminary hearing in the petition filed by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). The apex court admitted the ECP petition for regular hearing and issued notices to PTI Chairman Imran Khan, Asad Umer and Fawad Chaudhry. The Election Commission of Pakistan on October 13 had filed a petition in the apex court requesting the apex court to transfer and consolidate six petitions filed by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan and others, challenging its contempt notices in different high courts.

It had prayed the apex court to transfer and consolidate the six petitions before any one high court in the interests of expeditious disposal and justice. The ECP had submitted that in August and September, 2022, it issued notices in exercise of its powers of contempt adding that recipients of these notices invoked the constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of different high courts against the notices and contempt proceedings through four different petitions inter alia on the ground that Section 10 of the Elections Act, 2010, which is the statutory provision regarding the Election Commission’s power to punish for contempt, was ultra vires the Constitution.

On Tuesday, Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial observed that the Election Commission was relying on Article 186-A of the Constitution that relates to powers of the Supreme Court regarding transfer of cases from different high courts. The Chief Justice asked Sajeel Swati, counsel for the ECP, if there is any precedent of the apex court available for consolidating all the petitions.

The ECP counsel submitted that in the year 1999, the apex court had ordered for consolidating income tax cases, pending in different high courts. The Chief Justice, however, told the learned counsel for ECP that it was necessary for the petitioner to present a common legal point for consolidating the instant petitions. He further asked the ECP counsel as to who were the petitioners, challenging the contempt notices of the commission.

The ECP counsel replied that PTI Chairman Imran Khan and Fawad Chaudhry have invoked the jurisdiction of the learned high court of Lahore at Rawalpindi challenging its contempt notices, Asad Umer at Sindh High Court, Danyal Khalid at Islamabad High Court and Mian Shabbir at Lahore High Court, Lahore.

He further submitted that a single bench of the Lahore High Court has passed order dated 07.09.2022 in writ petition No2285/2022 for the constitution of a larger bench to hear the matter, and separate orders dated 21.09.2022 have been passed in writ petition No2604/2022 and writ petition No2605/2022 respectively for placing the said petitions before the larger bench.

Justice Ayesha A Malik, another member of the bench, observed that the Supreme Court in Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) cases had held that the cases will continue in the learned high courts and would not be consolidated.

Justice Athar Minallah, however, observed that the apex court in Haj assistance case had consolidated all the high court cases in one court.

ECP counsel Sajeel Swati however, contended that there will be a contrary verdict if the petitions filed by PTI challenging the commission’s contempt notices were heard in different high courts.

Meanwhile, the court issued notices to PTI Chairman Imran Khan, Asad Umer and Fawad Chaudhry and adjourned the hearing for date-in-office (indefinite period).

It is pertinent to mention here that in its petition, the ECP had contended that all the six petitions filed by PTI pertain to same subject matter and common questions of law arise, i.e. challenge to the vires of provisions of the Elections Act, 2017, particularly the powers of the Election Commission of Pakistan under Section 10 of the Elections Act, 2017 to punish for contempt. It had contended that simultaneous proceeding of these petitions before three different high courts is a time-consuming endeavour, and the principles of administration of justice would be better served if the matters were transferred to, and consolidated before, one high court.

“The transfer and consolidation will not only save the precious time of the high courts, it would also serve to reduce the financial burden on the public exchequer,” the ECP had further submitted.