KP CM’s lawyer challenges ECP jurisdiction to hear case filed by Haripur election candidate
Election Commission of Pakistan in Islamabad. Photo: Radio Pakistan
ISLAMABAD:
An Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) hearing on Monday saw heated exchanges as lawyers representing Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi challenged the commission’s jurisdiction in a case of intimidation of poll workers during the Haripur by-election.
The ECP had initiated proceedings after Sohail Afridi was accused of making threatening remarks during a public meeting in Abbottabad where he allegedly warned officials of the consequences if election day malpractice took place. The commission said such statements put “the safety of poll workers, police and voters” at risk and potentially violate the code of conduct that prohibits public officials from influencing elections.
The case opened with complaints from Advocate Ali Bukhari and Advocate General KP, who said lawyers were being mistreated at the ECP. Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikandar Sultan Raja apologized and assured action against the responsible officers.
Read: ECP takes note of KP CM’s remarks
He said the stop at the gate was due to security requirements. In an informal exchange, CEC lawyer Naeem told Panjhutha that he had even received a vote from CEC’s own household, which Panjhutha replied that he was aware of.
Special Secretary ECP maintained that Article 218(3) clearly outlines the powers of the commission and said action against the KP Chief Minister would proceed in accordance with the law.
The Peshawar High Court has earlier held that while Article 218(3) gives the ECP broad powers to ensure fair elections, its actions must still be based on statutory powers. This precedent has been cited in recent challenges involving the jurisdiction of the ECP.
“Lawyers were stopped and humiliated at the entrance, adding that he himself had also been stopped”, said Ali Bukhari. He reiterated that the ECP lacked jurisdiction to hear the case, saying a notice had already been issued by the District Monitoring Officer (DMO) of the constituency.
He questioned whether the matter could run before two forums simultaneously, pointing out that he had been summoned by the DMO prior to being summoned by the ECP and had again been summoned to file a reply on 27.
Read more: KP CM challenges ECP code of conduct notification in PHC
Afridi has already moved the Peshawar High Court, calling the ECP notification “malicious” and claiming it was issued without a mandatory report from the District Monitoring Officer, a core part of his challenge that echoes Bukhari’s argument in the hearing.
Bukhari insisted that the petition filed by Babar Nawaz be heard along with his own and warned that calling their side over a political meeting in Abbottabad would “open a new Pandora’s box.”
He also questioned whether the ECP would summon the Prime Minister and the Punjab Chief Minister for similar actions, noting that the Punjab Chief Minister had announced development projects worth Rs 2.5 billion. in Hassan Abdal. He argued that breaches of the code of conduct had occurred elsewhere without any summons being issued.
The controversy has already sparked political backlash, with PML-N leaders accusing Afridi of issuing threats to election officials. Punjab Information Minister Uzma Bukhari publicly criticized him, calling him “a habitual liar” and referring to his alleged warning that officers “would not see the sun of tomorrow.”
The Presidential Election Commission responded by saying that action would be taken “without discrimination” and clarified that if the Prime Minister had made such a speech before the election, he too would have been notified. Ministers and candidates in other constituencies had indeed been summoned for violations of the code of conduct, he added.
Babar Nawaz’s lawyer, Sajeel Swati, argued that the KP chief minister had clearly threatened the polling staff and stressed that the ECP’s authority did not end simply because a monitoring officer had imposed a fine.
Bukhari pressed the commission to first decide on the maintainability of the case. The ECP directed the KP Chief Minister’s counsel to file a written reply at the next hearing and said an appropriate order for maintenance would be issued. The commission granted Sohail Afridi dispensation from appearing at the next hearing and adjourned the case to December 4.
Later, Afridi’s counsel formally challenged the ECP’s jurisdiction and raised objections to the maintainability of the petitions. The Commission reserved its decision regarding Afridi’s application.
Salman Akram Raja said Sohail Afridi had appeared before the ECP and obeyed the law. A white paper on the Haripur elections would be issued soon, adding that they would continue to examine the “spirit of the law”, he added.
Also Read: PML-N’s Azma Rejects KP CM’s Claims
“Bukhari had objected to the commission, maintaining that all parties should be treated equally.” He added that the KP chief minister had not threatened anyone, saying it was within the chief minister’s right to admonish officers. He said a detailed reply would be sent to the ECP.
The legal team said a similar petition was already pending before the ECP in KP and argued that identical cases could not continue in two separate places. They maintained that there had been no interference in the election process and that the Prime Minister did not need to appear again.
Bukhari said they had based their arguments on two points, including that the case had been taken up under Article 218, adding that they would appear before the returning officer in Haripur as the case was already pending there. He also said that they had submitted details of the Punjab Chief Minister’s husband in support of their stand.
The case stems from complaints filed by Babar Nawaz, the by-election candidate, who accused Afridi of using his position to intimidate the administration. His petition claims that the ECP must act against any public official who tries to influence an election campaign, an argument reinforced by the commission’s earlier directive to its provincial chapter and the KP police chief to review Afridi’s remarks.
