ETs decide 35 pleas related to general elections 2024
With these decisions, the total number of resolved petitions has reached 171, accounting for 46 percent of the overall caseload pending before 23 tribunals across the four provinces.
Through its systematic tracking, Free and Fair Election Network (FAFEN) has identified 374 election petitions — 124 challenging the electoral outcomes in the National Assembly (NA) constituencies and 250 in the Provincial Assemblies' (PA) constituencies. So far, approximately two-thirds (62 percent) of the petitions related to NA constituencies, and half (50 percent) of those pertaining to PA constituencies, remain undecided.
During the reporting period, 28 of the 35 decided petitions were from Punjab, three each from Sindh and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and one from Balochistan.
In Punjab, the four Lahore-based tribunals decided 15 petitions, the Bahawalpur tribunal decided nine, while the Rawalpindi and Multan tribunals decided two each. In Sindh, the two Karachi tribunals decided three petitions.
In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the Bannu tribunal decided three cases. In Balochistan, a Quetta tribunal decided one petition.
While Punjab tribunals have gained pace in deciding the petitions, adjudication process in the remaining three provinces has slowed noticeably since April 2025. As many as 12 out of the 23 election tribunals have not concluded any petitions since April 21, 2025.
Overall, Balochistan's three tribunals have collectively decided 44 out of 52 petitions (85 percent) filed for NA and PA constituencies. Punjab's eight tribunals have resolved 94 out of 192 petitions (49 percent). Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's six tribunals have decided 12 out of 43 petitions (28 percent), while Sindh's five tribunals have disposed of 21 out of 84 petitions (25 percent).
Out of 124 petitions challenging NA constituency results, 47 (38 percent) have been decided thus far. These include 30 from Punjab, nine from Balochistan, five from Sindh, and three from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Regarding PA constituencies, 124 out of 250 petitions (50 percent) have been decided, including 64 from Punjab, 35 from Balochistan, 16 from Sindh, and nine from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Out of the 171 petitions decided so far, 168 have been dismissed, while only three have been accepted.
FAFEN has yet to obtain copies of tribunal decisions for 40 dismissed petitions—11 related to NA constituencies and 29 to PA constituencies—so the reasons for dismissal in these cases remain unknown.
The independent candidates supported by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) make the largest group of petitioners with 55 percent of total petitions filed by them, followed by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) candidates (13 percent), Pakistan People's Party Parliamentarians (PPPP) candidates (eight percent), unaffiliated independent candidates (seven percent) and JamiatUlma-e-Islam Pakistan (JUI-P) candidates (seven percent). As many as 16 other parties' candidates cumulatively account for the remaining 12 percent of the total petitions.
Around 65 percent petitions of independent candidates, 54 percent of PPPP, 54 percent of PML-N, 40 percent of JUI-F, and 38 percent of PTI-backed independent candidates have been disposed of till date.
The returned candidates belonging to PML-N make the largest group of defendants with 39 percent of the petitions challenging their victory, followed by PTI-backed candidates (16 percent), MuttahidaQaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) candidates and PPPP candidates (13 percent each), unaffiliated independents (six percent) and JUI-P (five percent). As many as 11 other defendant parties' candidates cumulatively account for the remaining eight percent petitions.
So far, 84 decisions of election tribunals have been contested before the Supreme Court. Among these, three appeals were initiated by the returned candidates against whom election petitions had been accepted.
Of these, Supreme Court has so far dismissed 12 appeals upholding the tribunals' decisions. These dismissed appeals were filed by candidates belonging to PPPP (four), PTI-backed independents (three), NP (two), and BNP-A, JUI-P, and unaffiliated independent (one each).
The remaining 71 appeals—21 pertaining to the National Assembly and 50 to the Provincial Assemblies—are currently under adjudication. These include 26 petitions challenging results in constituencies of Balochistan, 37 in Punjab, and eight in Sindh.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
5 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Putin demands Ukraine surrender Donbas and abandon NATO bid, sources say
Firefighters work at the site of a residential area hit by a Russian military strike, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in the town of Dobropillia, Donetsk region, Ukraine March 8, Reuters Vladimir Putin is demanding that Ukraine give up all of the eastern Donbas region, renounce ambitions to join NATO, remain neutral and keep Western troops out of the country, three sources familiar with top-level Kremlin thinking told Reuters. The Russian president met Donald Trump in Alaska on Friday for the first Russia-US summit in more than four years and spent almost all of their three-hour closed meeting discussing what a compromise on Ukraine might look like, according to the sources who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. Speaking afterwards beside Trump, Putin said the meeting would hopefully open up the road to peace in Ukraine - but neither leader gave specifics about what they discussed. Read More: Russia seeks say in Ukraine peace deal In the most detailed Russian-based reporting to date on Putin's offer at the summit, Reuters was able to outline the contours of what the Kremlin would like to see in a possible peace deal to end a war that has killed and injured hundreds of thousands of people. In essence, the Russian sources said, Putin has compromised on territorial demands he laid out in June 2024, which required Kyiv to cede the entirety of the four provinces Moscow claims as part of Russia: Dontesk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine - which make up the Donbas - plus Kherson and Zaporizhzhia in the south. Kyiv rejected those terms as tantamount to surrender. In his new proposal, the Russian president has stuck to his demand that Ukraine completely withdraw from the parts of the Donbas it still controls, according to the three sources. In return, though, Moscow would halt the current front lines in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, they added. Russia controls about 88% of the Donbas and 73% of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, according to US estimates and open-source data. Moscow is also willing to hand over the small parts of the Kharkiv, Sumy, and Dnipropetrovsk regions of Ukraine it controls as part of a possible deal, the sources said. Putin is sticking, too, to his previous demands that Ukraine give up its NATO ambitions and for a legally binding pledge from the US-led military alliance that it will not expand further eastwards, as well as for limits on the Ukrainian army and an agreement that no Western troops will be deployed on the ground in Ukraine as part of a peacekeeping force, the sources said. The district her village is in - Huairou - and neighbouring Miyun district, just on the outskirts of Beijing, received a year's worth of rain in a single week. Yet the two sides remain far apart, more than three years after Putin ordered thousands of Russian troops into Ukraine in a full-scale invasion that followed the annexation of the Crimean peninsula in 2014 and prolonged fighting in the country's east between Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian troops. Ukraine's foreign ministry had no immediate comment on the proposals. President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has repeatedly dismissed the idea of withdrawing from internationally recognised Ukrainian land as part of a deal, and has said the industrial Donbas region serves as a fortress holding back Russian advances deeper into Ukraine. "If we're talking about simply withdrawing from the east, we cannot do that," he told reporters in comments released by Kyiv on Thursday. "It is a matter of our country's survival, involving the strongest defensive lines." Joining NATO, meanwhile, is a strategic objective enshrined in the country's constitution and one which Kyiv sees as its most reliable security guarantee. Zelenskiy said it was not up to Russia to decide on the alliance's membership. The White House and NATO didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the Russian proposals. Political scientist Samuel Charap, chair in Russia and Eurasia Policy at RAND, a US-based global policy think-tank, said any requirement for Ukraine to withdraw from the Donbas remained a non-starter for Kyiv, both politically and strategically. "Openness to 'peace' on terms categorically unacceptable to the other side could be more of a performance for Trump than a sign of a true willingness to compromise," he added. "The only way to test that proposition is to begin a serious process at the working level to hash out those details." Trump: Putin wants to see it ended Russian forces currently control a fifth of Ukraine, an area about the size of the American state of Ohio, according to U.S. estimates and open-source maps. The three sources close to the Kremlin said the summit in the Alaskan city of Anchorage had ushered in the best chance for peace since the war began because there had been specific discussions about Russia's terms and Putin had shown a willingness to give ground. "Putin is ready for peace - for compromise. That is the message that was conveyed to Trump," one of the people said. The sources cautioned that it was unclear to Moscow whether Ukraine would be prepared to cede the remains of the Donbas, and that if it did not then the war would continue. Also unclear was whether or not the United States would give any recognition to Russian-held Ukrainian territory, they added. A fourth source said that though economic issues were secondary for Putin, he understood the economic vulnerability of Russia and the scale of the effort needed to go far further into Ukraine. Also Read: US Treasury official slams India for 'profiteering' off cheap Russian oil Trump has said he wants to end the "bloodbath" of the war and be remembered as a "peacemaker president". He said on Monday he had begun arranging, opens new tab a meeting between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, to be followed by a trilateral summit with the US president. "I believe Vladimir Putin wants to see it ended," Trump said beside Zelenskiy in the Oval office. "I feel confident we are going to get it solved." Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday that Putin was prepared to meet Zelenskiy but that all issues had to be worked through first and there was a question about Zelenskiy's authority to sign a peace deal. Putin has repeatedly raised doubts about Zelenskiy's legitimacy as his term in office was due to expire in May 2024 but the war means no new presidential election has yet been held. Kyiv says Zelenskiy remains the legitimate president. The leaders of Britain, France and Germany have said they are sceptical that Putin wants to end the war. Security guarantees for Ukraine Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff was instrumental in paving the way for the summit, and the latest drive for peace, according to two of the Russian sources. Witkoff met Putin in the Kremlin on August 6 with Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov. At the meeting, Putin conveyed clearly to Witkoff that he was ready to compromise and set out the contours of what he could accept for peace, according to two Russian sources. If Russia and Ukraine could reach an agreement, then there are various options for a formal deal - including a possible three-way Russia-Ukraine-U.S. deal that is recognised by the UN Security Council, one of the sources said. Another option is to go back to the failed 2022 Istanbul agreements, where Russia and Ukraine discussed Ukraine's permanent neutrality in return for security guarantees from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, the sources added. "There are two choices: war or peace, and if there is no peace, then there is more war," one of the people said.
Business Recorder
8 hours ago
- Business Recorder
21 countries sign joint statement condemning Israel's West Bank settlement project
LONDON: Britain and France were among 21 countries to sign a joint statement Thursday calling Israel's approval of a major settlement project in the West Bank 'unacceptable and a violation of international law'. Israel approved the plans for the roughly 12-square-kilometre (five-square-mile) parcel of land known as E1 just east of occupied Jerusalem on Wednesday. 'We condemn this decision and call for its immediate reversal in the strongest terms,' said the statement of foreign ministers, whose signatories also included Australia, Canada and Italy. Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden also signed the statement, as did the European Commission's foreign affairs chief. Israel pounds Gaza City as military takes first steps in offensive The statement noted that Israel's far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said the plan 'will make a two-state solution impossible by dividing any Palestinian state and restricting Palestinian access to Jerusalem'. 'This brings no benefits to the Israeli people,' the foreign ministers said. 'Instead, it risks undermining security and fuels further violence and instability, taking us further away from peace. 'The government of Israel still has an opportunity to stop the E1 plan going any further. We encourage them to urgently retract this plan,' they added. The plan seeks to build around 3,400 homes on the ultra-sensitive tract of land, which lies between Jerusalem and the Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim. All of Israel's settlements in the West Bank, occupied since 1967, are considered illegal under international law, regardless of whether they have Israeli planning permission. The Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority (PA) has slammed the latest move, which has also been criticised by UN chief Antonio Guterres. Britain on Thursday summoned Israeli ambassador to the UK Tzipi Hotovely to the foreign ministry to protest the decision. 'If implemented, these settlement plans would be a flagrant breach of international law and would divide a future Palestinian state in two, critically undermining a two-state solution,' the foreign office said in a statement.
Express Tribune
a day ago
- Express Tribune
Tel Aviv approves major West Bank settlement
The file photo shows a view of part of the Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Photo: REUTERS Israel approved a major settlement project on Wednesday in an area of the occupied West Bank that the international community has warned threatens the viability of a future Palestinian state. Israel has long had ambitions to build on the roughly 12-square-kilometre (five-square-mile) parcel known as E1 just east of Jerusalem, but the plan had been stalled for years amid international opposition. Critics say the settlement would effectively cut the West Bank in two, undermining hopes for a contiguous Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capital. Last week, Israel's far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich backed plans to build around 3,400 homes on the ultra-sensitive tract of land, which lies between Jerusalem and the Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim. "I am pleased to announce that just a short while ago, the civil administration approved the planning for the construction of the E1 neighbourhood," the mayor of Maale Adumim, Guy Yifrach, said in a statement Wednesday. The Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority swiftly slammed the move. "This undermines the chances of implementing the two-state solution, establishing a Palestinian state on the ground, and fragments its geographic and demographic unity," the PA's foreign ministry said in a statement. It added the move would entrench "division of the occupied West Bank into isolated areas and cantons that are disconnected from one another, turning them into something akin to real prisons, where movement is only possible through Israeli checkpoints and under the terror of armed settler militias". All of Israel's settlements in the West Bank, occupied since 1967, are considered illegal under international law, regardless of whether they have Israeli planning permission. Israel heavily restricts the movement of West Bank Palestinians, who must obtain permits from authorities to travel through checkpoints to cross into east Jerusalem or Israel.
