LAHORE: An application was moved before the Lahore High Court on Tuesday, seeking directions to restrain women members of National and Punjab assemblies from working as elected representatives.
The petition was filed by lawyer, Tariq Aziz Malik.
Applicant had already filed a constitutional petition challenging legal provision for reserved seats for women and minorities’ members on reserved seats in parliament and the Punjab Assembly.
Justice Ijazul Ahsan had issued notice to heads of PML-N, PTI, PPP, PML-Q and Election Commission on the said petition.
Applicant stated that under the constitution, these ladies were not termed as elected representatives as they were not properly elected.
He requested to restrain these ladies from acting as elected representative.
He had submitted in the main petition that there were 188 seats reserved for women in parliament and provincial assemblies. He stated it was an illegal and unconstitutional, as under Article 226 of the Constitution all elections shall be held by secret ballot.
He said every year these reserved seats costs Rs 1 billion on salaries, perks and privileges of these women, which is burden on the national exchequer.
He said there was no justification to allocate these seats and these could be allocated to technocrats, so that experts from different fields could come in assemblies to play their role in progress of the country.
He submitted that the Supreme Court full bench in 18th amendment judgment had already held these elections on reserved seats as ultra vires of the Constitution. He requested to declare women election on reserved seats as unconstitutional.
LHC serves another notice on PTI chief:
Chief Justice of Lahore High Court Umar Ata Bandial repeated a notice to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan on a petition of National Assembly Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq, challenging ECP order of directing inspection of election documents to be made before the returning officer of NA-122, Lahore.
The CJ, on August 28, had issued notices to Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and Imran Khan and had sought their replies.
The court was informed on Tuesday that nobody appeared on behalf of Khan and the chief justice ordered to re-issue notice to Khan for September 18.
The ECP counsel also submitted the reply but the CJ was not satisfied with it and directed to give detailed reply on it till next date of hearing.
The ECP submitted it had the authority to issue directions to the returning officer and objection of the petitioner was not justified.
Chief justice directed the ECP to submit written reply to explain how returning officer could be retained after holding of the elections.
The proceedings on this subject were initiated when Khan, after losing the election, had filed an application before the ECP for inspection of election record. The commission while allowing his application on June 18, 2013 had also allowed Khan to make another application for examination of documents before the returning officer concerned.
Sadiq, who had won the May 11 election on PML-N ticket from this constituency against Khan and later was elected as speaker of national assembly moved the petition against this order of the ECP.
Petitioner counsel Barrister Syeda Maqsooma Bokhari submitted that NA speaker had no objection to the inspection of election record, except ballot papers, in terms of section 45 of the Representation of the People Act, 1976. Counsel submitted that the impugned order granted the relief to Imran on the basis that the RO had the custody of the election record. She said presently the RO did not have any election record because the record had already been forwarded to the ECP as required by the law.
Counsel said there was no remedy of review available against the order passed by the ECP. She said the RO had completed his job and did not have the jurisdiction to conduct proceedings assigned to him by the impugned order of the ECP.
She requested to set aside the impugned order by declaring it void, illegal and unlawful. She further requested the court to stay the proceedings before the RO till final disposal of this petition.
