Ruling coalition given two-thirds majority as ECP notifies reserved seats
The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court overturned an earlier July 2024 ruling that had granted reserved seats to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), stripping the party of its eligibility to hold them. As a result, PTI ceased to be recognised as a parliamentary party.
Reserved seats: ECP says majority judgement premised on 'erroneous conclusion'
Responding to the court's majority decision, passed by a seven-judge bench, the ECP withdrew its previous notifications from July 2024 that had marked PTI-backed candidates as returned members of the National Assembly and various provincial legislatures. It then issued new notifications reallocating reserved seats among the PML-N, PPP, and JUI-F.
National Assembly composition recast
With the allocation of 13 additional reserved seats to the PML-N, 4 to the PPP, the ruling coalition now holds 235 seats in the 336-member house, well above the 224 required for a two-thirds majority. The opposition commands 98 seats, with JUI-F getting two seats, while one seat remains suspended,d and two reserved seats are currently vacant.
Provincial shifts
The ECP also reallocated reserved seats in the provincial assemblies:
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly: 10 seats to JUI-F, 7 to PML-N, 6 to PPP, and 1 each to PTI-Parliamentarians and Awami National Party (ANP).
Punjab Assembly: 23 to PML-N, 2 to PPP, and 1 each to PML-Q and Istehkam-i-Pakistan Party (IPP).
Sindh Assembly: 2 reserved seats to PPP and 1 to MQM-P.
PHC bars elected MPAs on reserved seats from taking oath
Legal background
The case stemmed from a March 2024 ruling by the Peshawar High Court, which barred the Sunni Ittehad Council, joined by PTI-backed independents after the February 8 elections, from claiming reserved seats.
While Justices Ayesha Malik and Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi initially rejected review petitions filed by the PML-N, PPP, and ECP, they were later removed from the Constitutional Bench.
Meanwhile, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail dissented, maintaining PTI's claim to 39 seats and urging reallocation to include the party.
A previous majority judgment had required independent candidates to clarify their political affiliations through notarised statements, leading to provisional recognition of some as PTI members.
However, in the final review, Justices Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi revised their earlier positions and supported the review petitions.
They directed the ECP to re-examine the nomination papers and affiliation declarations of all 80 returned candidates and issue decisions on the eligibility of reserved seats within 15 days.
The reallocation of these seats has reshaped legislative dynamics at the federal and provincial levels, marking a dramatic shift in parliamentary representation just months after the general elections.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Punjab speaker moves to disqualify 26 MPAs
Listen to article The Punjab Assembly Speaker Malik Ahmed Khan on Thursday filed a disqualification reference with the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) against 26 opposition members of the provincial assembly (MPAs) for "disparaging the sanctity of the house". The MPAs against whom the reference was sent to the electoral supervisor belong to the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC). Talking to media, the speaker confirmed the development, saying that those, who violated the sanctity of the house, would not be spared. "The matter is with the ECP, which may disqualify such members," he added. Malik Ahmed Khan said that it was not a democratic norm to resort to misconduct, use abusive language and resort to violence in parliament. "It is anti-democracy attitude". He said the Article 63 of the Constitution clearly defines the criteria for disqualification, and emphasised that every member of parliament takes oath to safeguard the Constitution. He vowed to fight the case for the protection of the Constitution. "It is my duty to maintain order in the house," said the Punjab Assembly speaker. "I am showing patience for more than one and a half years. I have to justify my role as the speaker," Malik Ahmed Khan stated. Earlier, the speaker directed a legal team to prepare a draft reference for consultation, before potentially submitting it to the ECP for the de-seating of 26 suspended SIC MPAs over their alleged disruptive, abusive and disorderly conduct in the house. The directive came during a meeting between the speaker and the legal experts after an initial determination that a reference could be filed based on the applications submitted by PML-N lawmakers, who urged the Speaker's Office to take action against the suspended members. On June 27, the situation in the Punjab Assembly aggravated as the opposition's noisy protest disrupted proceedings during Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz's addresses. Their conduct appeared even more aggressive, reportedly in response to the Supreme Court's ruling on reserved seats. The protest quickly escalated into scuffles between treasury and opposition lawmakers. Despite Speaker Khan's repeated efforts to control the situation, order could not be restored. Consequently, on the same day, the speaker suspended 26 opposition lawmakers, invoking Rule 210(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the Provincial Assembly of Punjab (1997). On June 28, the speaker, directed that Rs2,035,000 in damages be recovered from 10 PTI MPAs – approximately Rs203,550 each – for climbing onto desks and breaking eight microphones during their protest on June 16, when the provincial budget was being presented. It is worth noting that protest has historically been a recognised feature of parliamentary proceedings. Opposition lawmakers are often seen engaging in fiery exchanges, desk-thumping, slogan-chanting, tearing up agenda papers or budget documents and holding placards aloft.
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
May 9: IHC overturns sentence of 4 PTI workers
Listen to article The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday acquitted four Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) workers who had been convicted in connection with the May 9 riots. The convicts had challenged their sentences in the IHC. Earlier, the ATC, headed by Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra, had sentenced Sohail Khan, Mohammad Akram, Shahzeb and Mira Khan to 10 years in prison on May 30 for their alleged involvement in attacking a police station in Islamabad's Ramna area. The convicts had been charged under Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) Sections 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 186 (obstructing official duty), 188 (disobeying order of a public servant), 324 (attempted murder), 353 (assault on public servants), 436 (arson) and 440 (mischief); Section 144 of CrPC; and Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), 1997. They were sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment under Section 7 ATA, five years under Section 324 of PPC, four under Section 436, two each under sections 353 and 148. In total, 11 PTI members, including MNA Abdul Latif, were sentenced, but only four were arrested while the remaining suspects are still at large. May 9, 2023, refers to the day when former prime minister and PTI founding chairman Imran Khan was taken into custody by paramilitary Rangers from the Islamabad High Court premises on charges of corruption. The PTI founder's arrest sparked countrywide protests, during which demonstrators allegedly belonging to the former ruling party vandalized state-owned buildings and military installations, including the Lahore Corps Commander's House, commonly known as Jinnah House. Following the protests, several PTI leaders and workers were arrested on various charges, including setting government infrastructure on fire. On Thursday, a divisional bench of IHC comprising Justice Azam Khan and Justice Khadim Hussain Somroo overturned the verdict of ATC, declaring the sentences void after hearing arguments from both sides. PTI lawyers, including Babar Awan, Sardar Masroof and Amna Ali, represented the appellants in the IHC. Awan argued that out of nine prosecution witnesses, only one — ASI Muhammad Sharif — identified the accused. He said no injuries were reported despite allegations of gunfire. "Punish for crimes proven, but do not turn the system into a joke," he told the court. Justice Somroo questioned the prosecution about the evidence to which the prosecutor responded that evidence existed but requested additional time to present it. The court, however, rejected this plea, observing that all arguments had already been heard. The bench noted that no medico-legal certificates (MLCs) or injured persons were presented and questioned the basis for convictions without proving the accused were present at the crime scene. The IHC observed that none of the witnesses had stated in their testimonies that the accused were present at the site. The bench further questioned whether the court was now expected to convict solely on the basis of an identification parade.
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Allies, experts find loopholes
Listen to article Government allies as well as legal and political experts have termed the intent to move a reference against PTI/SIC MPAs for their disorderly conduct during a session by the Punjab Assembly speaker devoid of any logic and a measure too extreme. The filing of the reference before the ECP, though widely reported by the local media, could not be independently verified. It was reported that the speaker had filed a reference against 26 suspended MPAs of the Punjab Assembly before the ECP, and according to some media outlets, the provisions cited in the reference were Articles 14 and 210 of the Punjab Assembly Rules of Procedure, 1997. However, a plain reading of these articles makes it abundantly clear that they do not permit a reference for disqualification in any way. All legal and constitutional experts contacted by The Express Tribune concurred with this opinion and further noted that there is no provision under the rules that authorises the speaker to move a disqualification reference. The confusion was compounded by Speaker Malik Muhammad Khan who, while leaving the ECP office, when first asked by the media whether he had filed the reference answered in the negative (meaning no reference was filed). However, when the media sought clarification on whether the reference had actually been filed, he replied that "it was already there" — an ambiguous answer that left matters unresolved. Nonetheless, his tone and demeanor made one thing abundantly clear: the speaker was a man on a mission. The speaker elaborated that he had submitted to the ECP details regarding the conduct of those who violated their oath under the Constitution, asking, "How should they be dealt with?" He said that those who had taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and then breached it themselves raised serious questions about their integrity and credibility. He also spoke about the Constitution, which grants the assembly the right to formulate its own rules. He questioned where in these rules it is permitted for anyone in the house to grab another member by the collar, use foul language, vandalise assembly property or attack people. At the end of his media talk, he reiterated that those who violate their oath cannot be allowed to remain part of the assembly. Those familiar with the matter say that the MPAs brought this upon themselves by going up against the "mighty" Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz, who is seen as the PML-N's red line. These individuals say that the scenes witnessed that day were not unprecedented in the assembly; the only difference, they claim, was the presence of Maryam Nawaz. The move even drew criticism from government allies, who described it as a sad day for democracy and an overt attempt to eliminate opposition from the assembly. Former justice Wajihuddin Ahmed, while speaking to The Express Tribune, said that the speaker neither has the right nor the authority to seek the disqualification of any member of parliament merely for disorderly conduct. He said that if such a power were granted to the speaker, it would allow him to eliminate opposition from the assembly on one pretext or another. He further explained that a provincial assembly cannot even frame rules to this effect under the Constitution, as matters of qualification and disqualification are clearly defined in the Constitution and can only be changed through a constitutional amendment. "The pre-condition given in the Constitution and the Election Act does not apply in this scenario of seeking disqualification. One fails to see the logic behind this move." Former Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Abid Zuberi said that while the speaker's move might lack legal standing, the ECP still has the capacity to take a lenient view and accommodate the speaker's wishes. He said law and rules have taken a back seat in the country and anything and everything is possible. He said if one speaks strictly within the framework of existing law, the short answer is that "the speaker does not have the authority". SCBA President Mian Rauf Atta, speaking to The Express Tribune, said that the law permits only suspension, not disqualification. He said that instead of taking such positions, the speaker should show magnanimity and embrace the opposition with open arms. He noted that the opposition is there to do its job, i.e., oppose the government; and the government should not be too concerned with their protestation. Atta, however, said that the opposition should also remain within respectful limits. He added that the speaker's move would further deepen the divide between the two benches in the house and ultimately diminish his own stature. "Nothing that happened in the Punjab Assembly that day attracts disqualification" he said and added hopefully, the ECP will not entertain this request. PILDAT President Ahmad Bilal Mehboob also agreed, saying that in his view, there was no ground for disqualification. However, he said that decorum must be maintained in the assembly at all costs by the speaker if the house is to function effectively. He said that while the punitive actions taken against the MPAs were indeed justified, it was difficult to make sense of this move at this juncture given the limited information available to him. "The move seems a bit too excessive," he added. He said that nothing has been committed that would warrant disqualification. The PPP and IPP have both opposed the reference, terming it a move in bad taste. PPP's Hasan Murtaza said that the speaker should have abstained from taking such an "extreme step." "Suspension and a fine make sense; moving a reference does not," he added. When asked about media reports suggesting that this harsh move was meant to teach a lesson to those who crossed the PML-N's red line, he said that it seems the PML-N is now hurt because they are getting a taste of their own medicine. He questioned how they could forget the pejorative epithets, slurs, foul language and propaganda campaigns they once ran against their slain leader Benazir Bhutto. He added that every woman — whether in parliament or elsewhere — should be considered a red line, not just Maryam Nawaz. He emphasized that this was no way to deal with political dissent. IPP leader Raja Yawar also disagreed with the speaker's decision to move the reference, calling it a step too far. He said that the speaker is otherwise a reasonable man, but "God knows what pressure he is under." He added that this move would only diminish the speaker's stature and predicted that the reference would soon end up in the bin.
