ISLAMABAD – The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court on Monday rejected the plea seeking to declare candidates who secure 50 percent more votes as the winners in elections.
A Constitutional bench seven-member bench led by Justice Ameenuddin Khan heard several cases.
The bench included Justices Ayesha Malik, Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Mohammad Ali Mazhar, Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Musarrat Hilali.
The bench imposed a fine of Rs20,000 on the petitioner for filing a baseless case.
During the hearing, Justice Mohammad Mazhar remarked, “Which constitutional provision mandates that a candidate must receive 50% votes in an election? The decision of the winning candidate is based on the votes cast, and if voters do not go to vote, what can be done about it?”
Justice Ayesha Malik remarked, “First, it must be shown which fundamental right of the petitioner has been violated and which Articles of the Constitution are being breached.” Justice Jamal Mandokhel stated, “If a new law needs to be made, the Supreme Court does not have the authority.”
The petitioner, Akram, argued that all the fundamental rights raised in this petition are linked to the issue, and that Parliament makes decisions regarding our lives. Justice Ameenuddin Khan replied, “Parliament does not decide your life.”
Justice Musarrat Hilali remarked, “Everyone has the right to vote. On polling day, people watch TV and do not go to vote. If voters do not cast their votes, it is their own weakness,”.
Justice Mandokhel asked, “Did you cast your vote in the February 2024 election?”
Petitioner Mohammad Akram responded that he did not vote.
Justice Jamal Mandokhel remarked, “You are disrespecting the Constitution.”
The Constitutional Bench imposed a fine of Rs. 20,000 on the petitioner for filing a frivolous petition.
The petitioner requested a fine of at least Rs100 billion to reduce the national debt.
Justice Ameenuddin Khan replied, “You do not have the capacity to pay a fine of 100 billion,”.
The Constitutional Bench began hearing the appeal regarding the requirement for independent candidates to join political parties. The petitioner, Moulvi Iqbal Haider, appeared via video link and informed the court that the matter had already been settled, and his petition had become ineffective.
Justice Ameenuddin Khan observed, “You have been granted permission to present in the court premises; this is sufficient for you,”. The Constitutional Bench disposed of the petition on the grounds that it had become ineffective.
During the hearing, the lawyer for the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) stated that notices could not be delivered to many parties in the case, which challenges the decisions of the Lahore and Karachi High Courts. The addresses for about 400 individuals may be incorrect.
The Constitutional Bench directed that the notices be published through newspaper advertisements. The FBR lawyer also raised the issue of the appeals’ admissibility in the case, which the court stated would be heard at the next hearing.
The bench adjourned the case for further hearing for three weeks.
