PESHAWAR – The Peshawar High Court (PHC) lifted the stay order that had temporarily suspended the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) decision regarding the PTI’s intra-party polls and the use of their election symbol — the bat.
Justice Ejaz Khan, part of a single-member bench, delivered the verdict that had been anticipated since earlier in the day.
Legal representatives from both the ECP, including Sikander Bashir Mohmand, and PTI’s legal team with Advocates Shah Faisal Uthmankhel and Qazi Anwar were present during the court proceedings.
Previously, the ECP had contested its December 26 ruling, which temporarily restored the ‘bat’ symbol to PTI pending a final decision. The ECP’s order had invalidated PTI’s intra-party polls and symbol usage. Consequently, the party approached the PHC to reinstate its symbol ahead of the upcoming February 8 general elections.
In response, the ECP petitioned the court to reassess PTI’s intra-party elections and their symbol allocation.
The court had previously heard arguments from the ECP’s counsel, adjourning the session to the present day.
During the hearing, Advocate Anwar, representing PTI alongside Barrister Gohar Khan, mentioned political alliances supporting the Election Commission, but Justice Khan reiterated that external opinions didn’t influence legal proceedings.
PTI’s lawyer questioned the legality of the ECP’s petition against the high court’s ruling, highlighting the delay in implementing the court’s December 26 decision and the absence of an election certificate on the ECP’s website.
Responding to queries about a contempt case, PTI’s counsel emphasized the importance of inclusive democratic processes and urged fair elections under the ECP’s oversight.
Advocate Anwar further raised doubts regarding the ECP’s authority to challenge a high court order.
Later, the ECP’s representative clarified that their aim wasn’t to expel parties but to ensure compliance with electoral laws. Mohmand reiterated that PTI’s intra-party polls had been invalidated due to non-compliance and requested the court to revoke the party’s stay order.
Following these arguments, the court reserved its verdict, considering both parties’ perspectives.
