The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Tuesday dismissed a Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) petition against Maryam Nawaz Sharif and declared her eligible to serve as vice president of the Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N).
A three-member ECP bench headed by Chief Election Commissioner Justice (retd) Sardar Raza Khan had reserved its verdict after hearing arguments on Monday.
The petition was filed by PTI lawmakers including Farrukh Habib, Maleeka Bukhari, Kanwal Shauzab and Javeria Zafar after Maryam’s appointment as PML-N vice president in May this year.
The petition contended that Maryam’s appointment as PML-N vice president was in contravention of constitutional principles since she was convicted in a corruption case in July 2018.
On Monday, PTI lawyer Hassan Maan argued that the Supreme Court had made it clear that no convicted person could hold party office.
He told the court that Maryam was convicted over a National Accountability Bureau (NAB) reference and, therefore, could not hold any party office.
The PTI lawyer said the apex court had noted that Section 203 of the Elections Act — which deals with party offices and membership of political parties — should be read with Articles 62, 63, and 63-A of the Constitution, which detail the qualification of the public representatives.
The lawyer recalled that a PTI candidate in South Punjab, Rai Hasan Nawaz, was stripped of his party designation on the same clause, which bars disqualified leaders from holding a position in any political party.
Jahangir Jadoon, the lawyer for the PML-N, had argued that Maryam was appointed and not elected to the party post. He further pointed out that the petitioners were not affected by the PML-N’s internal decision.
He argued that the ECP had previously dismissed pleas wherein the applicants were not the affected parties. Maryam’s lawyer, Barrister Zafarullah, said a constitutional article cannot be read with a law.
He said joining a party or holding a party office was a fundamental right of any citizen of Pakistan, and the ECP did not need to make decisions based on its previous decisions.
