On Monday, the Supreme Court resumed hearings on a petition filed by the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC), which is backed by PTI-supported candidates. The petition challenges the denial of reserved assembly seats for women and minorities.
PTI-SIC lawyer Faisal Siddiqui presented arguments on behalf of the SIC, advocating for a progressive interpretation of the constitution. He referenced a recent judgment by Justice Mandukhel to support his argument.
Justice Aminuddin Khan sought clarification on the process for a member to join political parties. Chief Justice Isa questioned whether the natural meaning of the Constitution should be disregarded, and if so, why.
Read More: How much is spent on each national assembly session in Pakistan?
Siddiqui responded that the core issue is the purpose of constitutional provisions. Justice Mandukhel questioned the rationale behind allocating special seats to those who did not participate in the elections. Justice Saadat expressed concerns that adhering strictly to constitutional wording could undermine its intent, noting that SIC has not been recognized as a political party.
Justice Minallah pointed out that a political party losing its election symbol ceases to be a political party, and mentioned that the PTI was categorized by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) as an unlisted political entity.
Chief Justice Isa questioned why PTI members would join another party if PTI is still considered a political party, suggesting that the argument contradicts the party’s own stance. He remarked, “If this argument is accepted as true, then why did you commit suicide by joining another party?”
Counsel Siddiqui informed the court that a revision over PTI’s intra-party elections was still pending.
