**Rewritten Article:**
**ISLAMABAD:** The Supreme Court, refusing to suspend the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) May 29 ruling, has directed the formation of a larger five-judge bench to resolve the dispute over the appointment of election tribunals by either the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) or the high court.
A two-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa issued this directive while hearing an appeal by the ECP challenging the LHC's order.
The court declined the plea of senior counsel Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, representing the ECP, to stay the LHC's decision. Mohmand expressed concerns that the judgement could hinder constructive dialogue between the ECP and the LHC Chief Justice.
On May 29, the LHC had ruled that the Chief Justice of the high court holds primary authority in appointing election tribunals under Section 140 of the Elections Act 2017.
While the Supreme Court did not grant interim relief to the ECP, legal experts view the court's stance as functionally equivalent to a stay order. This is because the ECP counsel indicated ongoing consultations and an upcoming meeting between the ECP Chief and the LHC Chief Justice.
Consequently, the ECP is unlikely to refer any disputes to the eight tribunals appointed by the LHC.
Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa emphasized the public expectation that constitutional officeholders avoid confrontation, underscoring that adherence to the law is crucial for the country's proper functioning.
The Supreme Court also instructed the ECP to provide correspondence and notifications related to tribunal appointments in other provinces.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan queried why similar disputes had not arisen in other provinces and requested correspondence between the ECP and other high courts to understand the Punjab-specific controversy. He cited precedents from KP and his tenure as Chief Justice of the Balochistan High Court, where tribunal appointments were made by the ECP.
Senior counsel Salman Akram Raja argued that petitions before the high court were valid due to the delayed appointment of sufficient tribunals, noting that only two were appointed belatedly by the ECP. He contended that while the ECP is a constitutional body, it lacks judicial authority to appoint tribunals, which falls under the purview of the high court with meaningful consultation.
Raja suggested that the ECP should have pursued intra-court appeals instead of directly approaching the Supreme Court against the LHC's decision.
Advocate Niazullah Khan Niazi sought inclusion of nine supporters in the case as respondents, stressing their interest in supporting Raja's arguments.
Given the substantial constitutional and legal issues raised by the parties, the Supreme Court deemed it appropriate to grant leave and issued a notice to Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan for his views, considering the matter involves interpretations of the Constitution and the Elections Act, 2017.
0 Comments