Infostani International: In a recent development, the Supreme Court, led by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, accepted PTI candidate Umar Aslam’s nomination papers, clarifying its stance on disqualifications for proclaimed offenders. Despite a legal paradox, the Court directed the Election Commission to expedite steps for Umar Aslam’s participation in the upcoming NA-87 seat election. The petitioner’s journey highlights the complexities surrounding election nominations.
Supreme Court Grants PTI Candidate Permission to Contest Elections Despite Legal Paradox in Nomination Paper Approval
Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah authored a two-page written order accepting PTI candidate Umar Aslam’s nomination papers, asserting that courts cannot unilaterally impose disqualifications on proclaimed offenders from contesting elections without specific constitutional or Elections Act provisions. The order clarified that Article 62 (1) (d), (e), (f), and (g) had been recently declared by the Court as non-self-executory, serving as voter guidelines rather than automatic disqualification criteria. Therefore, being a proclaimed offender does not trigger disqualification under these provisions, as per the Court’s interpretation.
Umar Aslam, a PTI leader, received permission to contest elections from the NA seat on Friday. Despite one rejected application for his election candidacy, another was approved, leading to a legal paradox. A division bench of the Supreme Court heard appeals against rejected nomination papers by returning officers.
Supreme Court Directs ECP to Expedite Electoral Process for NA-87 Seat Amid Nomination Paper Controversy
The Supreme Court’s order instructed the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to promptly complete all necessary steps in the electoral process, ensuring the petitioner’s ability to contest the election on the scheduled date for the NA-87 seat.
The petitioner, seeking leave to appeal against the Lahore High Court’s order, had his nomination paper rejected by returning officers on December 30, 2023, citing proclaimed offender status in a criminal case. The appellate tribunal later overturned the RO’s decision, accepting the nomination paper. However, the objector-respondent challenged this decision in the high court, resulting in an order on January 12, 2024, rejecting the petitioner’s nomination paper.