The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Saturday fixed a hearing for Imran Khan’s petition against the Election Commission of Pakistan’s move to remove him as the PTI chairman in the Toshakhana case. A five member larger bench headed by Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan will hear the plea on April 12.
The petition, filed through Senator Barrister Syed Ali Zafar, pleads that the cognisance and exercise of jurisdiction by the ECP on the basis of alleged incorrect statement of assets and subsequent disqualification was unlawful and contrary to the Constitution.
The ECP had on Dec 5, 2022 initiated the process to remove Imran as the PTI chairman in light of its verdict in the Toshakhana case. He was disqualified under Article 63(1p) of the Constitution for making “false statements and incorrect declaration”.
It informed the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Dec 13, 2022 that it had initiated proceedings to remove Imran from the post of PTI chairman.
Consequently, Imran on Jan 4 approached the LHC against the ECP’s proceedings, pleading that the cognisance and exercise of jurisdiction by the ECP on the basis of alleged incorrect statement of assets and subsequent disqualification was unlawful and contrary to the Constitution.
A day later, the LHC passed an interim order, barring the commission from removing Imran as the chairman of the PTI in pursuance of the verdict issued in the Toshakhana case.
The court will resume the hearing on April 12 and allow both parties in the ongoing case to present their arguments. While the ECP issued the impugned notice to Imran on Dec 7, 2022, the petition argues that the entire scheme of his qualification and disqualification had been “misconstrued” and the precedent set by the Supreme Court in the disqualification of former premier Nawaz Sharif has been “misapplied” to the detriment of Imran.
No declaration of disqualification under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution has been passed by any court of law against Mr Khan, the petition states.
“In fact the impugned findings of ECP are to the detriment of the entire scheme of parliamentary democracy which is not warranted in law and are liable to be set aside by the court,” it adds. It argues that the ECP cannot issue the impugned notice to the petitioner since it never made a declaration against him under Article 62(1)(f). It requests the LHC to declare the impugned notice illegal and hold that the ECP findings against the petitioner are without lawful authority.
