close
Friday March 29, 2024

ECP issues warrants for Imran in contempt case

By Faisal Kamal Pasha
September 15, 2017

ISLAMABAD: The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Thursday issued bailable arrest warrants for Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan in contempt of court case.

A five-member commission, headed by Chief Election Commissioner Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza, ordered the PTI chief to submit surety bonds of Rs100,000 till September 25. Imran Khan again failed to appear before the commission in Thursday’s proceeding. The commission ordered him to appear before the court on September 25. The counsel for Imran Khan, Babar Awan, argued that the party chief was abroad and that he had returned to the country just an hour ago.

Imran Khan respected the ECP and would appear before it whenever it ordered, he added.Ahmad Hassan, the counsel for the petitioner, argued that the ECP’s orders had been violated as despite the commission’s order, Imran Khan did not come today.

He observed that Imran Khan should have appeared before the commission, if he truly respected the ECP.He asked the commission to continue its proceeding in accordance with the law.On this, the ECP reserved its judgment in the contempt case and issued bailable arrest warrants for the PTI chief.

It is pertinent to mention here that the ECP had issued the contempt notice to Imran Khan on January 24 over his remarks about the commission on the petitions filed by former PTI member Akbar S Babar seeking Imran Khan’s disqualification.

Last month, the ECP issued a second show cause notice to Imran Khan after he failed to reply to the earlier notice regarding the contempt of court proceedings against him.

Challenging the commission’s authority to hear the case, Imran Khan also raised objections to the ECP’s jurisdiction to initiate contempt proceedings against him, however, the commission ruled that it was within the ECP’s jurisdiction to take action on contempt of court.

Talking to the media outside the ECP, the founding member of PTI, Akbar S Babar, said that Imran Khan was in the country and he should have appeared before the commission. He said the PTI chief Imran was deliberately avoiding cases against him in the ECP.

Meanwhile, the larger bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) here turned down Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s request to restrain the ECP from proceeding in contempt of court matter against Imran Khan after his counsel Babar Awan, advocate, told the court that the Election Commissionbail-able arrest warrants for his client due to non-appearance.

IHC larger bench said that next hearing of the case at ECP was September 25 whereas IHC bench might decide this case before. Later IHC bench headed by Justice Aamer Farooq and comprising Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb adjourned hearing till September 20.

Legal counsel for Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan, Babar Awan advocate argued before the court that the ECP had no powers to initiate contempt of court proceedings against his client for non-appearance. He said that PTI chairman had submitted a written apology through his counsel that ECP did not accept. Supreme Court of Pakistan had even accepted apology tendered by Abdul Hameed Dogar and LFO judges. Advocate Awan argued that it appeared from the language of show-cause notices issued to Imran Khan that ECP just wanted to penalise his client.

Imran Khan's counsel said that under the relevant laws a counsel could plead, make a statement, withdraw or even record statement on behalf of his client. But ECP was not following the law and the order seemed to be biased, he said.

He said that once he himself recorded statement on behalf of Benazir Bhutto when she submitted an additional statement later on and the court accepted it.

He said that the Contempt of Court Act, 1976, was repealed by the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003, and contempt proceedings were carried out through the Ordinance of 2003 in the entire country.

Under the amended law, ECP had been provided to proceed for contempt under section 103A of the Representation of People’s Act, 1976, and it was not amended to the extent of the Ordinance of 2003. “It is, therefore, that ECP has no power to proceed for contempt,” he added.

“The ECP has no powers to proceed for its contempt unless, an amendment is made to Section 103-A,” Babar Awan said.

IHC Chief Justice had formed a larger bench to hear this matter. PTI chairman in this case has challenged an order of the ECP dated August 10 where the poll supervisory body issued show cause notice to him under section 103A of the Representation of People’s Act 1976 and under Article 204 of the Constitution regarding contempt of court for non-appearance in foreign funding case.

On August 30, Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb of the IHC after hearing arguments from Imran Khan's counsel Babar Awan advocate referred the matter to the IHC chief justice to form a larger bench to hear this matter.

ECP on August 10 dismissing Imran Khan's application against show cause notices had declared that it had the legal right to hear the contempt of court case. Beside this, ECP on August 16 directed PTI chairman to submit details of party's foreign funding. An IHC bench on September 7 also directed PTI to submit details of the party’s foreign funds and its sources to the ECP within a fortnight. PTI had agreed to the submission of these details with a condition that ECP might not share these documents with anyone else and keep the same to itself only. In the matter, before the IHC larger bench, Imran Khan, through his counsel Babar Awan advocate, now challenged the dismissal of his August 10 application by the ECP. 

The petitioner told the court that ECP initiated proceedings against him in relation to an order dated January 16, 2017.

Petitioner Imran Khan said that his counsel had raised objections that ECP did not have powers to proceed for its contempt. ECP heard the objection petition and dismissed it on August 10, 2017. Petitioner is aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order as it is against the law and facts. Petitioner said that ECP had no power to initiate proceedings under Article 204 (Contempt of Court) of the Constitution, adding that no party could be left without remedy and it was a worst case of abuse of process of law and the impugned order was whimsical, mala fide on law and facts as well as based on abundant bias.

The petitioner requested the court to set aside contempt proceedings initiated against him by the ECP declaring these unlawful and void.

Outside the court, PTI leader Naeemul Haq while talking to the media said that the election laws were weak, incomplete and there was a need to reframe these laws. Under the relevant election laws, Nawaz Sharif could run a campaign for his party candidates and not Imran Khan. Imran Khan's counsel Babar Awan said that he wanted to rectify this misperception that after Nawaz Sharif, Imran Khan would also be disqualified. Akbar S Babar said that Imran Khan considered himself above the law. All ideological party workers think that he should resign from the chairmanship, he said.