ECP objects to retired SC judge's remarks about 2023 ruling on polls in Punjab and KP, reserved seats case

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Monday objected to remarks made by former senior puisne judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Mansoor Ali Shah, regarding polls in KP and Punjab and the reserved seats case pertaining to the PTI.

Shah made the remarks at an event organised by the US-based Community Alliance for Peace and Justice on October 29, where he was asked about his dissenting opinion in the 2023 SC ruling on provincial elections in Punjab and KP and whether it was a “turning point” and the beginning of a “division” within the SC.

In its 3-2 verdict, the SC, after taking a suo motu notice, directed that elections should be held within 90 days in both provinces. Two judges, including Shah, had dissented from the ruling, saying that the suo motu proceedings initiated by then-chief justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, were “wholly unjustified”, besides being initiated with “undue haste”.

In their detailed reasoning, they explained that the SC by a majority of 4-3 and not 3-2 had dismissed the suo motu hearing on polls delay in Punjab and KP and therefore the same should be considered as the “Order of the Court”.

It had resulted in a controversy, with the government igniting a raging debate claiming that the ruling was a 4-3 majority decision in its favour and not a 3-2 verdict against.

In response to the question, Shah said that this was the time when the ex-chief justice was “forming like-minded benches”.

He said that at the time, two SC judges — Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Athar Minallah — had dismissed suo motu proceedings and petitions in the case. He said that it was “decided that the high court would decide the case” and the appeal would “naturally come to the SC”. He alleged that the whole judgement was centred around the concept of a “one-man show”.

Shah also defended the 2024 verdict in the reserved seats case, wherein PTI was declared eligible for seats reserved for women and minorities, in a setback to the ruling coalition.

“We said that the PTI was a political party and it was wrong to deprive [them of their symbol] … and illegal,” he said, recalling that this was a decision “that nobody liked”.

In a statement on Wednesday, the ECP referred to the remarks made by Shah, saying that they ignored “basic constitutional and legal facts related to the election matters and judicial decisions”.

“It is highly inappropriate to present the judicial record for specific purposes through selective quotations, incomplete perspectives and one-sided interpretations,” the statement said.

The electoral watchdog said that Shah had claimed that the SC’s majority decision about the elections in 2023 was a 4-3 verdict and that the suo motu notice and relevant petitions were dismissed.

The ECP also stated that according to Shah’s claims, the election ruling was a “minority decision” and the commission could not have held polls.

Regarding the PTI case, it said that Shah had declared the order for withdrawal of the party’s electoral symbol during the 2024 elections as “illegal”.

The commission said that the election symbol was subject to transparent intra-party elections as per Sections 208 and 209 of the Election Act 2017. It added that “till date, PTI has not been able to fulfil the requirement”.

The ECP said PTI was supposed to hold intra-party elections by June 30, 2021, and the commission had given the party three chances; however, the party failed to hold intra-party elections.

As a result, the commission said that the party’s election symbol was withdrawn, which, the ECP added, was also upheld by the SC in 2025, along with rejecting review petitions filed by the PTI.

The ECP further stated that PTI held intra-party elections after five years and its proceedings remained pending before the commission as the “PTI itself has taken a stay order from a high court”. It further stated that as per the commission’s records, the PTI was still enlisted as a political party.

The ECP added that only political parties which contested the elections had a right to the reserved seats.

“These political parties are required to submit a preferred list of candidates before the elections, while PTI has not submitted any preferred list,” it stated.

It further stated that it was mandatory for a political party to win at least one seat and that independent members were not entitled to reserved seats and therefore, the ECP gave the seats to the eligible parties.

It said that if the PTI was entitled to the reserved seats, then “Articles 51 and 106 of the Constitution and Section 104 of the Elections Act 2917 become ineffective”.

The ECP said that it was “unfortunate” that a retired judge was taking a position against the Constitution and the law.

In November 2025, Shah had resigned as an SC judge alongside Minallah, hours after the 27th Constitutional Amendment — which made significant changes to the country’s judicial system and established the Federal Constitutional Court — was signed into law by President Asif Ali Zardari.

“By fracturing the unity of the nation’s apex court, it has crippled judicial independence and integrity, pushing the country back by decades,” he wrote in the letter sent to the president.

“Staying on would not only amount to silent acquiescence in a constitutional wrong, but would also mean continuing to sit in a court whose constitutional voice has been muted,” he said.