Multiple possibilities after SC verdict

LAHORE: The Supreme Court’s decision to oust Nawaz Sharif from the party presidency has created a massive confusion regarding the upcoming Senate elections as there are multiple possibilities as a result of this verdict.

The apex court in its short order ruled that “as a result of the above declaration (ouster from party presidency), all steps taken, all orders passed, directions given and documents issued by the Respondent No 4 (Nawaz) as party head after his disqualification on 28.7.2017 are also declared to have never been taken, passed, given or issued in the eyes of the law.”

This meant that the Senate tickets issued with the authority/ signature of Nawaz stood null and void as well which propped up suspicions regarding the candidature of those contesting with the PML-N ticket. According to legal experts, there are three eventualities that could culminate as a result of this verdict.

The first option would be that that the elections would go ahead as per schedule, with or without those contesting on the PML-N ticket.

Former Lahore High Court Bar Association president Shafqat Mehmood Chohan is among those who believe that the system does not need to be contorted in any way to accommodate those who willingly put themselves in this position.

According to Chohan, the candidates knew that the petition was pending in the court and this was a possibility, so now they have no one to blame for not being able to contest.

The second possibility is that the parliamentarians would move the court regarding this issue. The short order does not mention any specifics as to what modus operandi would be adopted for the Senate elections as a consequence of this decision. However, if the detailed judgment too would not address this issue, the court could be moved for clarity as well as on the basis the fundamental rights of representation.

Formal addition attorney Abdul Hayee Gilani is of the view that while in theory, the elections could go ahead without the PML-N candidates, but it is highly unlikely as that would lead to utter chaos which even the court wouldn’t want. He argues that the most likely route would be to move the court for an opportunity of either sustaining the candidature of those with the PML-N ticket or to provide an extension in time for them to resubmit their papers with the authority of the new party head, whoever that might be.

However, a third and maybe the most interesting intricacy of this entire scenario is that the PML-N candidates would contest the Senate polls as independent and join the party later under the new party head.

According to former senators and certain legal experts, the annulling of party’s ticket does not annul the candidature of the Senate candidate altogether. Barrister Farogh Naseem, MQM MNA Syed Ali Raza Abidi and Sindh Assembly opposition leader Faisal Subzwari argue that this decision only annuls the party association of the candidate and not the candidature.

The nomination is filed by a proposer and an approver who need to be the Parliament members with no regard to party affiliation. Therefore, the candidature and its approval by the ECP is based on the authenticity of the nominee’s credentials, not the party certificate/ ticket, they say.

The annulment of the tickets awarded under Nawaz’s signature, while annul the party affiliation of these senate aspirants; it does not cancel their candidature to contest without the party affiliation. With their party affiliation annulled they can still contest as independent candidates and once they have won their seat, can join alliance with the party, Subzwari and Abidi say.

Meanwhile, lawyer and activist Jibran Nasir says the ECP spokesperson has already clarified that although the apex court’s decision is supreme, the ECP holds the right to delay the elections if it deems that doing so would avoid a chaotic situation.

Veteran constitutional expert Abid Hassan Manto is of the view that the detailed judgement would most likely have some guideline as how this Senate elections conundrum as a result of this unprecedented verdict could be resolved and it would be premature for him to comment on it.