ISLAMABAD: Counsel for the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) heavyweights were on the same page when it came to the jurisdiction of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to hear disqualification pleas against them over concealment of assets, including offshore companies revealed in the Panama Papers.

They all challenged the ECP’s jurisdiction to take up the petitions and argued that the question of jurisdiction should be decided first.

A full bench of the commission, headed by Chief Election Commissioner retired Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, agreed on Wednesday to decide the issue of jurisdiction first, but asked the respondents to submit written replies with respect to the allegations levelled against them before the next hearing, fixed for Oct 10.

The respondents include Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif and his son Hamza Shahbaz, the prime minister’s son-in-law retired Captain Mohammad Safdar, Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, PTI Chairman Imran Khan, PTI Secretary General Jahangir Tareen, Senator Liaquat Tarakai and two PTI members of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly.

The ECP is also hearing a foreign funding case against the PTI. All the respondents have so far defied repeated ECP orders to file written replies.

Former attorney general Salman Butt, who appeared on behalf of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, argued that the ECP was not the appropriate forum to hear such petitions. He said there were several decisions of the apex court stating that such cases should be taken up at appropriate forums.

Advocate Faisal Hussain, appearing on behalf of Nawabzada Salahuddin — the petitioner in the case against Capt Safdar — said that following the latter’s failure to refute allegations of fact raised in the petition, they need not be proved.

The principle has been well-settled by law that a fact admitted by the respondent needs not be proved as required by the law under Article 113 of the Qanoon-i-Shahadat Order 1984. This clearly manifests that no facts need to be proven in any proceedings which are deemed to have been admitted by any rule or pleading in force at the time.

He said Capt Safdar had nothing to offer in his defence and had miserably failed to rebut the allegations raised in the petition, or the documentary evidence provided. “It would not be out of place to mention that the respondent has failed to avail the opportunities given by this commission, hence it will be unjust and unfair to demand any further opportunity,” he argued.

He argued that the ECP was a permanent body that was constitutionally bound to hold elections, fairly, honestly and justly and also make arrangements to curb and guard against the corrupt and illegal practices, and was vested with the jurisdiction to entertain the matter in hand.

Foreign funding case

The full bench also adjourned the hearing of the PTI’s foreign funding case until Oct 10. The case was filed by PTI founding member Akbar S. Babar in November 2014.

Initially, no PTI lawyer was present during the hearing. According to the CEC, the lawyer had informed the ECP in the morning that the PTI writ petition in the Islamabad High Court seeking suspension of hearings in the ECP was to be heard the same day. However, he later joined proceedings with the plea that he had only gone to the IHC to submit an application for urgent hearing of the PTI writ petition.

Syed Ahmed Hasan, counsel for Mr Babar, stated he was unaware of any hearing in the IHC. He complained that the filing of any application in the IHC on the day when the ECP was hearing the case was indicative of delaying tactics employed by the PTI.

He requested the ECP to order the PTI to submit all documents, including registration documents of the PTI LLCs registered in the USA.

While the petitioner’s lawyer was busy demanding further action on the production of financial documents by the PTI, the party’s lawyer joined proceedings. Once again, the CEC asked him why the PTI had filed an application in the IHC the same day when an ECP hearing was scheduled.

He then passed an order saying that the PTI should bring all the financial documents sought by the petitioner to the next hearing, scheduled for Oct 10.

Published in Dawn September 29th, 2016