ISLAMABAD, Feb 2: A counsel defending the Sharif brothers in the electoral eligibility case told the Supreme Court on Monday that former prime minister Nawaz Sharif was discriminated against when his nomination papers for the 2008 general elections were rejected because of his conviction in the plane conspiracy case.

“Although the cases against Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Javed Hashmi are pending and on record, their nominations were accepted by returning officers while those of Mr Sharif were rejected,” senior lawyer Mohammad Akram Sheikh argued before a three-member bench comprising Justice Mohammad Moosa K. Leghari, Justice Syed Sakhi Hussain Bukhari and Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali.

The bench is hearing appeals of the federal government against the June 23, 2008, order of the Lahore High Court disqualifying Mr Sharif from contesting a by-election for having been convicted in the plane conspiracy case.

Placing before the court a news item suggesting that the prime minister was still facing two cases in the National Accountability Bureau about misuse of powers, although the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) had terminated all cases registered between 1986 and 1999, Akram Sheikh argued that the convictions unless set aside or suspended remained in the field and at the time of the filing of nomination papers by the prime minister it was neither suspended nor annulled.

Besides, the government which had failed to produce the presidential pardon granted to the Sharif brothers in the LHC, was now claiming that it had the necessary document and could place it before the Supreme Court, as if to turn it into a trial court, he deplored.

However, the counsel was corrected by Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali who said that the appeal was a continuation of trial meaning thereby that the cases against the prime minister and Javed Hashmi were different from that of Mr Sharif. Besides, the Supreme Court was always vested with more powers than any trial court, he added.

“The Sharif brothers should have taken the benefit by filing appeals against their conviction in time,” the judge observed.

Akram Sheikh, who is representing Mehr Zafar Iqbal, proposer of Mr Sharif’s candidature, argued that the acceptance of Mr Sharif’s nomination papers by the returning officer of NA-123 (Lahore) for the by-election had attained finality since the approval of the papers was challenged by Noor Ellahi, an independent candidate, after the time for filing appeals had run out. Besides, no material proving the conviction of Mr Sharif had ever been produced before the tribunal.

Moreover, the objectors, Noor Ellahi, Syed Khurram Ali Shah (a voter) and Akhlaque Ahmed Guddu, were represented by a single counsel who was considered to be a million-dollar lawyer, Mr Sheikh said, recalling that Akhlaque Guddu had then withdrawn his objection.

“Whom these objectors were fronting and who was funding them,” the counsel asked and said that credentials of Khurram Shah should have been scrutinised during the proceedings before the election tribunal.

The application filed by Khurram Shah in the tribunal, Mr Sheikh argued, was full of venom and mala fide against the twice-elected prime minister. Besides he was also not a voter since he was a resident of a different constituency, NA-127 (Shalimar Town) in Lahore.

“Khurram Shah is a known associate of former Punjab chief minister Pervez Elahi. No one endeavoured to test the bona fide of Khurram before the tribunal and none asked what was his locus standi,” Mr Sheikh lamented.Citing election laws, he said that scrutiny before the tribunal had never been an open-ended affair and no passerby could just jump into the proceedings.

Akram Sheikh tried to establish that election disputes had never been private matters between two parties but a question of the right to defend one’s constituency and the Constitution. “In the US, the right to choose is considered more important than the fundamental right to life,” he said.

At the fag-end of the proceedings, the bench ignored a request to allow Mehr Zafar Iqbal and Shakil Beg, proposer and seconder of Sharif brothers’ candidature, to leave for Lahore. They are attending the proceedings on the directive of the court.

The court also asked Akram Sheikh to enlighten it about the legal status of civil society and whether the civil society was a registered institution. The suggestion came when the counsel told the court that he was representing Mr Sharif as a representative of the civil society because the people of NA-123 wanted to see Mr Sharif elected from the constituency.