Elahi’s wife moves SC for declaring her victory in NA-64

ISLAMABAD: Wife of former chief minister Punjab Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi on Wednesday requested the Supreme Court (SC) to declare her as the returned candidate for the National Assembly constituency NA-64 Gujrat in general election recently held on February 8.

Qaisra Elahi filed an appeal in the apex court under Section 9(5) of the Election Act 2017 against the order passed by Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on February 20, 2024, declaring Chaudhry Salik Hussain as the returned candidate for NA-64, Gujrat III.

She has made ECP, Returning Officer (RO) NA-64 Gujrat III and Chaudhry Salik Hussain and others as respondents. Filed through Barrister Haris Azmat, Qaisra Elahi prayed the apex court to allow her appeal by setting aside the impugned order dated 20.02.2024, passed by the ECP and declare her as the returned candidate.

She further prayed the apex court to issue direction that the result be consolidated on the basis of actual Form 45 besides setting aside the notification declaring Chaudhry Salik Hussain as the returned candidate from NA-64.

Qaisara Elahi submitted that she had won the elections by more than 100,000 votes and now if the respondent Chaudhry Salik Hussain was declared as the winner, it will be a big blow to democracy and due process in the country. “This illegality must be corrected by this court and now,” she requested, adding that the ECP has failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it by the Constitution and the EC Act for conducting free and fair elections and the impugned order has been passed without conducting any enquiry as mandated in terms of Section 9(1) of the EC Act. She contended that Section 9(1) empowers the commission where “from the facts apparent on the face of the record and after enquiry as it may deem necessary” to make an appropriate declaration. “No such enquiry on admitted facts has been conducted by the ECP and for this score alone, the impugned order cannot be sustained,” Qaisra Elahi submitted.

The petitioner further submitted that the ECP has failed to take into account Section 9(3) and (4) of the EC Act which categorically state that for 60 days from the election, the commission is the tribunal and can devise any procedure. “Hence, in view of the commission itself being the tribunal cannot dismiss the petition for availing the appropriate remedy from the tribunal while the sixty days had not lapsed,” she contended.

She requested that the apex court may also take judicial notice of the fact that this is a manner of systematic rigging, which is not deployed in the instant constituency but is prevalent across the country where rigging has taken place. “So this illegal action of changing form 45s has to be corrected now,” she submitted. In view of the same, much importance has to be given to the Form 45 at this stage, she stressed.