Lahore High Court’s Justice Khalid Ishaq rejected petitions filed by the former opposition leader in the Punjab assembly Malik Ahmad Khan Bhachar and former Mna Muhammad Ahmad Chatha, who challenged the Election Commission in Pakistan’s (ECP), who marked them. The Court noted that since the petitions are refugees from justice in all cases, they cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this court for judicial review.
The subtle but crucial distinction of a “Nexus to the case” is the key factor that finally determines the applicability – or otherwise – of the fleeting Disentite Disease in a civil case brought by a criminal refugee.
Use of this doctrine to the facts in these cases leads to the inevitable conclusion that the ECP’s messages challenged through these constitutional petitions are inextricably linked to the convictions of the plea.
ALSO READ: Govt ‘totally non-serial’ on the 27th change, new provinces: RANA
The respondents questioned the maintenance of these petitions and argued that the petitions are criminal sentences who have not submitted to the proper process, therefore remaining, therefore, they claimed that the petitions have no right to invoke this court’s extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction in accordance with Article 199 of the Constitution.
The extra law lawyer for Pakistan argued for this maintenance point in dependence on different judgments. In short, the further lawyer claimed that judicial review of jurisdiction cannot be assigned to the petitions in these circumstances, as fair jurisdiction should not help a refugee from justice.
He also argued that a citizen who sought the intervention of this court must first show how he is entitled to a means when he is guilty of braiding a court decision – specifically, fled by conviction.
Eventually, he said that Jurisdiction under Article 199 is extraordinary and fair and should not be exercised by someone who has approached the right of “unclean hands”, which is a refugee from justice. The lawyers who represented the ECP largely adopted his arguments.
In response to the question of maintenance, the attorneys’ lawyers claimed that despite a criminal conviction, civil rights remain protected. For example, it is not related to challenge the ECP’s intended notifications via Article 199 with the criminal conviction, and the fleeting status should only affect the specific cases where conviction took place – not all cases.
Case information
It is worth mentioning that the petries had challenged their disqualification and tried to stop coming by polls in their election power.
Read: Imran’s nephew Shershah sent on the Five-Day in custody in May 9 Riots Case
The petitioners’ lawyer claimed that no procedures can be initiated against a member of the assembly without a referral from the speaker. They noted that the legislators were disqualified without being heard, which violates the principles of natural justice.
The ECP disqualified the petries in their beliefs in May 9 cases of courts against terrorism. The court’s court had sentenced to 10 years in prison.
