ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan Monday challenged the jurisdiction of the Election Commission of Pakistan to hear a contempt case against him.
Imran’s new lawyer Babar Awan argued that the ECP did not have the constitutional powers to hear the contempt case filed by PTI founding leader Akbar S. Babar for accusing the commission of being biased in the foreign funding case (against Imran).
Babar Awan argued that the contempt powers of the commission stood done away with through an ordinance in 2003. Previously, lawyers representing Imran managed to get the proceedings delayed on the plea that his reply to the contempt notice was ready awaiting his signature and due to his travel to Nathiagali on vacation and other cities he could not sign the reply.
Now the PTI chairman has taken a completely new plea through his lawyer that the ECP cannot not even hear the contempt case and the matter of filing a reply is premature. Babar Awan made detailed arguments on why the ECP could not proceed in the case. He said alleging bias is the inherent right of the defendant and that it could not be labeled as ‘contempt.’
The contempt case was adjourned until July 19 on which date the petitioner’s lawyer Syed Ahmed Hasan would make his rebuttal. In the PTI foreign funding case, which was also heard in the ECP, the PTI once again failed to comply with the ECP order to produce financial accounts sought since April 1, 2015 ECP order.
In its order the electoral body had stated that the annual PTI audit reports submitted before it did not contain source and details of foreign funding. Instead of complying with the last ECP order of submitting the documents, two volumes of PTI’s submissions in the Supreme Court and the Islamabad High Court were submitted.
The PTI lawyer once again sought adjournment until the final judgement in a similar case was being heard by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The chief election commissioner and another member of the ECP repeated that the Supreme Court had not passed any injunctions against proceeding in the case and that the PTI continues with non-compliance of its orders to produce financial accounts.
At this point the petitioner, Akbar S. Babar, personally argued that the CEC was well aware of the PTI’s delaying tactics since November 2014, when the case was first filed. He alleged that the PTI had repeatedly flouted the orders of the ECP to produce financial documents.
He said it was vital for the constitutional bodies to exercise their jurisdiction under law to enforce its orders without which its credibility would continue to suffer. He said the financial documents sought have a profound bearing on the merits of the case and must be produced by PTI without further delay. The CEC responded that in case PTI fails to submit the documents, all legal inferences can be drawn during detailed arguments set for the next hearing date.
The petitioner requested that in case of another long adjournment sought by the PTI lawyer on the excuse that the senior lawyer is on leave, a commitment should be sought whereby daily hearings are conducted from the next hearing date. On this the CEC passed an order for the next hearing date of August 16 when the merits of the case would be heard and orders passed.
Talking to the media outside the ECP, Akbar S. Babar criticised Imran for what he alleged open defiance of a constitutional body. He said Imran wasdamaging constitutional bodies brick by brick by not complying with its orders.
“To be role models, political leaders must take a lead to offer themselves for accountability before law instead of hiding from it which is the way of crooks and criminals,” he maintained. He said the trustees of public money, whether tax payers or public donations, must be equally held accountable under the law. Babar said he intended to expose the ‘Chanda Mafia’ in public since Imran continued to refuse to divulge PTI accounts for fear of being exposed of the billions collected illegally and mostly siphoned off.
Babar alleged that only from Saudi Arabia crores of rupees were annually collected by Zulqarnain Ali Khan, a friend of Imran. Nobody knows where these funds are transferred as there is no record of it in the PTI audit reports.
He said a private company is used to collect and disburse these funds from an estimated 8,000 PTI members who donate 100 Riyals annually. He said similar illegal ways are adopted to collect funds in the UAE about which there is no record in the PTI audit reports submitted before the ECP. End.
Earlier, Imran’s counsel Babar Awan remarked that Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) does not have jurisdiction to hear contempt of court cases, while presenting initial arguments in case against party chief Imran.
A five-member ECP bench, led by Chief Election Commissioner Justice (retd) Sardar Muhammad Raza, was hearing the case pertaining to a contempt of court by Imran. Babar Awan argued that only the Supreme Court and high courts had the jurisdiction over contempt of court case.
Responding to this, the petitioner’s lawyer asked for a few days to submit a reply to this. The hearing was adjourned till July 19. Speaking to the media, PTI’s spokesperson Fawad Chaudhry pointed out that the arguments of party’s legal counsel were based on technical points.
“We want the ECP to accept our plea,” he remarked. Countering statements of political opponents, he said they were spreading a false information in the media. "There is no case in which Imran can be disqualified from contesting elections," he claimed. “There is a lot of difference between Imran and Nawaz Sharif. Imran’s family is not facing any corruption charges,” he said.
