KARACHI: The Grand Democratic Alliance (GDA) heaved a sigh of relief on Thursday when the Sindh High Court allowed its two keys leaders, Dr Fehmida Mirza and her spouse Dr Zulfiqar Mirza, to run in the Feb 8 general elections.

The couple had approached the high court after the returning officers concerned and an appellate election tribunal had rejected their candidature for one National Assembly and three Sindh Assembly seats of Badin.

They had submitted five petitions impugning the orders of ROs and tribunal and prayed to the SHC to set aside the impugned decisions; and sought directives to the election watchdog and ROs to accept their candidature.

After hearing arguments from the parties concerned at length, a two-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi allowed all the petitions for the reasons to be recorded later.

The bench in its short order said: “Heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the record with their assistance and examined the case law relied upon by the learned counsel in support of their arguments. For the reasons to be recorded later on, the impugned orders passed by the returning officers as well as Election Appellate Tribunal are set-aside and instant petitions are allowed”.

Disqualification orders of ROs, Election Appellate Tribunal set aside

Initially, the petitioners had filed their nomination papers for a NA and three provincial assembly seats from their home town, but the ROs had rejected the same and on Jan 8, an appellate election tribunal had also turned down their appeals for not disclosing in nomination papers a financial facility availed by the couple’s Mirza Sugar Mills.

The petitioners asserted that the financial facility provided by the Muslim Commercial Bank to the Mirza Sugar Mills and Pangrio Sugar Mills, which were public listed companies and Dr Fehmida and her husband’s shareholding in the firms was limited to 12.7pc only.

They contended that their nomination papers were rejected over the financial liability in question, but the loans in question had been obtained or written off by the companies and not Dr Fehmida herself.

Impleading the ECP, provincial election commissioner, ROs, MCB and others as respondents, the petitioners submitted that they had filed nomination papers from NA-223 (Badin-II) while former Sindh home minister had also submitted candidature for three provincial assembly seats (PS-70, PS-71 & PS-72).

It is further contended in the petitions that the petitioners cannot be construed to be owners and neither can such loan be constructed to be loan obtained by former speaker National Assembly or her spouse or dependents.

As per the decree, issued by SHC last year, the directors of Mirza Sugar Mills were found liable to pay an amount of around Rs219.7 million, the petitions maintained.

They argued that the ROs and tribunal had failed to appreciate even the judgement and decree passed by the SHC as the same had abundantly made it clear that the liability of directors, including Dr Fehmida Mirza, raised out of the personal guarantee submitted by her and not pursuant to any loan obtained by her in personal capacity.

They further maintained that the SHC had already decided that any person holding less than 51pc shares in a company, which was a defaulter regarding a loan, could not be disqualified to contest elections since he/she in his/her personal capacity has not obtained any loan and the same did not fall within the definition of a defaulter.

They asserted that the candidature of petitioners could not be rejected under Article 63(1)(n) of the Constitution as well as Section 231 and 232 of the Election Act, 2017.

Published in Dawn, January 19th, 2024