Special Correspondent
The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has dismissed a reference filed against at least 20 dissident lawmakers of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) under Article 63-A for defying the party’s directives.
The reference was forwarded to the election watchdog by the speaker of the National Assembly seeking the disqualification of the ‘defectors’ from the National Assembly over alleged floor-crossing.
The disqualification reference against the members had been moved under the relevant constitutional provision – which stipulates de-seating of a party member in the event of defection – after they came out in public against the former Imran Khan-led government, joining voices with the then-opposition parties.
The lawmaker who faced the reference included Raja Riaz, Noor Alam Khan, Farrukh Altaf, Samiul Hassan Gillani, Mobin Ahmed, Basit Bukhari, Aamir Gopang, Ajmal Farooq Khosa, Riaz Mazari, Javeria Zafar, Wajiha Qamar, Nuzhat Pathan, Ramesh Kumar, Amir Liaquat, Asim Nazir, Nawab Sher and Afzal Dhandla.
Earlier in the day, the ECP refused to entertain an application by the PTI seeking to present additional record regarding the reference.
During the hearing, Noor Alam Khan’s lawyer, Barrister Gohar, said Alam was a member of the PTI and he never intended to leave the former ruling party.
“Alam expressed his disagreements with some decisions of the party which is his democratic right,” the lawyer said, adding that his client did not join any other parliamentary party.
Alam did not cast his vote in the no-confidence motion against then PM Imran, the lawyer said, adding that Article 63-A cannot be used against the PTI lawmaker.
Faisal Chaudhry, the PTI lawyer, said they would file an appeal against the ECP decision. He asked the ECP to share the copy of the decision, adding that the case has become “contentious” in the eyes of the PTI.
Earlier this week, the dissident members had submitted their response to the ECP and termed the reference baseless. The dissident PTI members had said that the references against them were “baseless and false” as they were still part of the former ruling party, therefore, there was no violation of Article 63-A.
It may be noted here that a reference seeking interpretation of Article 63-A is also being heard by the Supreme Court. The president on the advice of then prime minister Imran Khan had sought the interpretation of the article in the wake of a no-confidence motion against Imran.
After the ouster, Imran had also filed a petition in the top court seeking a lifetime ban on ‘defectors’ as they would not remain ‘honest and truthful’ for betraying the party.
Comments are closed.