The constitutional bench of the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday disposed of the petition related to making it binding on independent candidates to join political parties after winning the elections, saying it was ‘ineffective’, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.
A seven-member bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, heard the plea filed by Maulvi Iqbal Haider, who appeared in the court via a video link.
Addressing the petitioner, Justice Amin said it was more than enough for him that he was allowed to enter the court premises.
The petitioner questioned whether he could now assume that his plea was no more effective.
Later, the court disposed of the petition.
Also on Monday, the bench dismissed the petition, seeking the issuance of a victory notification for the candidate receiving more than 50 per cent of votes in elections.
The bench also slapped Rs20,000 in fine on Muhammad Akram, the petitioner.
During the hearing, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar questioned under which section of the constitution, could it be declared mandatory for a candidate to secure 50 per cent of votes. “The winner is decided on the basis of votes cast in his or her favour,” the judge said, and added, “What could be done if the people themselves are not interested in casting votes?”
Justice Ayesha A. Malik asked which basic right of the plaintiff had been infringed upon. “Which article of the constitution has been violated?” she questioned.
Justice Jamal Mandokhel remarked that if the petitioner wanted legislation on the subject, then it did not lie in the jurisdiction of the apex court.
The petitioner argued that all basic rights were connected to this plea. “It’s the parliament whose decisions affect our lives.”
Disagreeing with his argument, Justice Amin said it was not the parliament that determined people’s lives.
Justice Musarrat Hilali said that every person had the right to vote. “People mostly watch television on the election day. They don’t go out to vote,” she remarked.
The judge was of the view that if people did not cast their votes, then they were to blame, and nobody else.
Justice Mandokhel asked the plaintiff whether he had cast his vote on February 8, 2024. The latter replied in negative.
“Then you are insulting the constitution,” the judge retorted.
Reporter: Amanat Gishkori