PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on Thursday dismissed a petition against a constitutional amendment, which allowed the appointment of a retired senior civil servant or a technocrat as the chief election commissioner (CEC) of Pakistan.

A bench consisting of Chief Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth and Justice Mohammad Naeem Anwar pronounced a short order of dismissing the petition, which also sought order to declare the appointment of the current CEC unconstitutional, after the lawyers of the both sides finished arguments.

Petitioner Ali Azim Afridi, a lawyer, contended that the relevant section of Constitution (Twenty-Second Amendment) Act, 2016, was in conflict with the Constitution.

He requested the court to declare the appointment of the current CEC, Sikander Sultan Raja, a former senior civil servant, unconstitutional.

The respondents in the petition were the Federation of Pakistan through law secretary and CEC Sikander Sultan Raja.

PHC CJ-led bench to issue detailed verdict later

The petitioner contended that his grievance revolved around Section 4 of the Constitution (Twenty-Second Amendment) Act, 2016, to the extent of allowing the appointment of a senior civil servant and technocrat as the CEC by treating them on a par with that of a Supreme Court judge and on that score enabling them to supervise the role of a high court judge while acting as member of the Election Commission of Pakistan under Article 218(2)(b) of the Constitution.

He said the Constitution (Twenty-Second Amendment) Act, 2016, was enacted in June 2016 and previously, Article 213(2) of the Constitution provided that no person shall be appointed to be CEC unless he is, or has been, a judge of the Supreme Court or is, or has been, a judge of a high court and is qualified to be appointed a judge of Supreme Court.

The petitioner said through Section 4 of the impugned Constitutional Amendment, Article 213(2) of the Constitution was amended declaring, “No person shall be appointed Commissioner unless he has been a judge of the Supreme Court or has been a senior civil servant or is a technocrat and is not more than sixty-eight years of age.”

He said the office of a Supreme Court judge and that of a high court judge was recognised by the Constitution and was placed at a higher pedestal based on their duties and responsibilities as ordained by the Constitution.

The petitioner said neither a senior civil servant nor a technocrat could be given an equal status with that of a Supreme Court or high court judge.

Barrister Sarjeel Swathi and Khurram Shehzad appeared for the CEC and contended that the petition was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed.

They said the petitioner was not an aggrieved person in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution.

The counsel said a constitutional amendment passed by Parliament couldn’t be strike down it it was challenged by a single individual.

They said the petitioner couldn’t prove any mala fide on part of the legislature for enacting that amendment.

Published in Dawn, September 11th, 2020