On Monday, the Supreme Court resumed hearing a petition filed by the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) — now the new home for PTI-backed candidates — against the denial of reserved seats in assemblies for women and minorities.
A 13-member full court, including Justices Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Munib Akhtar, Yahya Afridi, Aminuddin Khan, Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha Malik, Athar Minallah, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Shahid Waheed, Irfan Saadat Khan, and Naeem Akhtar Afghan, is presiding over the case. The proceedings are broadcast live on the Supreme Court’s website and its YouTube channel.
Previously, PTI-backed independent candidates joined the SIC after winning the February 8 elections, following a Supreme Court ruling that deprived their party of its electoral symbol ‘bat’.
In a 4-1 verdict in March, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) ruled that the SIC was not entitled to claim quotas for reserved seats due to “non-curable legal defects” and violations of the mandatory provision for submitting a party list for reserved seats. The ECP decided to distribute the seats among other parliamentary parties, with PML-N and PPP gaining 16 and five additional seats respectively, while Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam—Fazl (JUI-F) received four. The PTI rejected this verdict as unconstitutional.
In the same month, the Peshawar High Court (PHC) dismissed an SIC plea challenging the ECP decision, denying it reserved seats. However, on May 6, a three-member Supreme Court bench suspended the PHC verdict regarding the distribution of reserved seats above the initially allocated ones to political parties. Following this ruling, the ECP suspended victory notifications for 77 lawmakers, causing the ruling coalition to lose its two-thirds majority in the National Assembly.
In late May, a full court was constituted to hear the case, including all judges except Justice Musarrat Hilali. During the June 3 hearing, Justice Mandokhail noted that the public did not vote for independent candidates but for those nominated by PTI in the February 8 elections. Justice Shah suggested that the controversy could end if the ECP allowed formerly independent candidates three additional days to decide whether to join another political party.
Subsequent hearings saw judges scrutinize both the ECP’s decisions and the Supreme Court’s January 13 verdict that denied the PTI its electoral symbol. Chief Justice Isa defended the January 13 verdict, while Justice Akhtar criticized it, stating that the PTI lost its poll symbol due to the judgment, leading to a “cascading series of errors” by the ECP.
Chief Justice Isa questioned why PTI candidates did not independently demand the bat symbol in each constituency. Faisal Siddiqui, representing the SIC, argued that demanding the bat symbol would subvert the January 13 judgment, a view Justice Akhtar echoed.
Both sides’ counsels — SIC and the beneficiary parties (including PPP and PML-N) — were given two days to sum up their arguments starting from today’s hearing.
On Saturday, the ECP, through senior counsel Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, justified its decision to deny the SIC reserved seats. The ECP argued that the SIC did not meet the criteria to be considered a political party under Articles 51(6)(d), 56(6)(e), and 106(3)(c) of the Constitution, and failed to submit a priority list (Form 66) for reserved seats in a timely manner. Additionally, the ECP noted that Article 3 of the SIC’s constitution restricted party membership to adult Muslims only, violating Articles 17 (freedom of association), 20 (freedom to profess religion), and 25 (equality of citizens) of the Constitution.
Advocate Siddiqui presented his arguments before the court today. After a brief break at around 11 am, the hearing resumed 40 minutes later.
