LAHORE: Saif ul-Malook Khokhar, a lawgiver of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) who lost the election for the desirable post of Punjab Assembly speaker to a ruling candidate, moved to Lahore high court (LHC) against the vote, claiming it had been commanded in an “illegal” and “unconstitutional manner”.
PML-N Movers To Lahore High Court:
Khokhar, a joint candidate of the joint party Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) alliance, was lost by Sardar Sibtain Khan,who was MP for Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) from the Mianwali-IV constituency, who was selective twenty-first speaker of the provincial legislature during a heated election on Friday.
Sibtain Khan secured the seat with one hundred eighty-five votes against one hundred seventy-five polled for Khokhar. Of the 364 votes solid, four were rejected — 3 of the opposition and one amongst the PTI.
The polling proceeded mostly smoothly, however, was marred by the PML-N accusing the govt. of attempting to trace ballots — violating the secrecy of the vote — by printing serial numbers on them.
Similarly, PML-N’s Khalil Tahir Sindhu raised by point of objection associated with the position of the polling booth, saying that cameras were put in higher than it. After his objection, the placement of the polling booth was modified.
The seat was vacated when Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi of the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q) was elected the chief minister earlier on.
Khokhar content in his petition that the ballot papers and counterfoils were serial numbered in such a way that an alternative exercised by every MPA may be known by examination of the serial number on the ballot paper and serial number and signatures of MPAs on the counterfoils of the ballot papers. As a result, the secrecy of the ballot may simply be broken.
The petition additionally read that the non-holding of the election of the speaker through balloting is blatantly unconstitutional, black, and without jurisdiction.
He additionally pointed out that under the Constitution and Rules of Procedure of the Provincial Assembly of the Punjab, 1997, the governor was to come to decide the date for the speaker’s election when the position fell vacant.
Khokhar’s petition additionally read that it’s the privilege of the governor to repair a date for the election of a brand new speaker if the assembly is in session, as shortly as doable throughout that session and if the assembly is not in session, at the commencement of the following session.
Instead, he said, permission was sought-after to maneuver a resolution for suspending the relevant assembly rules, particularly the governor’s powers to summon a session for the speaker’s election, within the house the panel of chairmen — whose members preside over proceedings within the absence of the speaker and deputy speaker — granted the permission.
Highlighting the panel of chairmen from the treasury benches, Khokhar aforesaid the resolution for suspending the assembly rules was then “quickly” adopted by treasury members.
On these grounds, Khokhar urged the court to declare the speaker’s election “void” and issue directives for holding the poll, “strictly following the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution”.
He additional prayed the court to restrain Sibatin from “exercising powers and functions of the speaker” throughout the pendency of his petition.