The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Thursday rejected PTI’s plea seeking recounting of votes in PP-7 Rawalpindi-II – which it lost to the PML-N by a margin of 49 votes. .
The decision was announced by a five-member bench headed by Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikandar Sultan Raja.
In the brief judgment, he said that the petitioner, PTI candidate Shabbir Awan, could neither prove any fraud or irregularity during the election nor was he able to explain the reasons for the recounting.
Soon after its announcement, PTI leader Shafqat Mehmood took to Twitter to describe the decision as “against the law”. “The loss of neutrality and integrity by the ECP has far-reaching consequences for democracy,” he said.
during Punjab by-election Raja Sagir of PML-N had won by just 49 votes defeating Awan in the by-election to the provincial assembly seat held on Sunday. PTI had also raised questions on the delay in the declaration of results in the constituency.
Subsequently, Avan presented application To the Returning Officer and requested for a recalculation. His argument was, however, denied Criticism of PTI
He had said that the difference of votes between him and the winning candidate “comes within the prescribed limit of five per cent of the total turnout and 10,000 votes as per section 95(5) of the Election Act, 2017”.
Later, Avan contacted The Rawalpindi Bench of the Lahore High Court criticized the “illegal decision” of the RO to dismiss the petition for recalculation in PP-7.
But on Wednesday, the court restrained the RO from consolidating the result of PP-7 and converted Awan’s plea challenging the RO’s decision to dismiss the petition for recalculation into an application to be taken up by the ECP. .
“In order to streamline the process, the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent” [ECP] On July 21 at 10 am when necessary work will be done,” it had said.
RTS system was not used in the by-election
The PTI petition claimed that the results were uploaded on the RTS system.
During the hearing today, the CEC found that PTI had not filed any application till 5 pm on the day of the election.
“You submitted a request to the R&I department, but withdrew it after 10 minutes,” he said, even after PTI blamed the ECP.
The CEC then called officials of the R&I branch and asked them to submit a written account of what happened on election day, saying that all matters should be clear.
Here, Awan’s lawyer said that his client was present in the court on the orders of the LHC.
Subsequently, while reading out PTI’s plea submitted in the High Court, the ECP chief refuted the party’s claim that the RTS system was used during the bypolls.
Arguments of PTI, PML-N
At the beginning of the hearing, Awan’s lawyer said that he had approached the court because the difference between the votes of the two sides was too small.
“Our law states that if the margin is less than five per cent, a request for recalculation can be filed.”
He argued that as soon as the results were declared, his client immediately approached the RO and later the court for recounting.
PML-N leader Raja Sagir’s counsel termed PTI’s request as “baseless”. “They failed to prove their point even in front of the RO.
“At first they were talking about the entire constituency. Now they are talking about 21 polling stations.
Awan’s petition
none of that petition The claim filed with the ECP claimed that there was a delay in the result of PP-7 though all the presiding officers had reached the RO in time. “… the result, despite all presiding officers arriving on time, was declared late on 18-07-2022 at 1:40 hrs, while the results for other constituencies before 17-07-2022 at 8:00 hrs were declared, [that] Questions raised on counting of votes [in] said constituency”, the petition reads.
The petitioner further claimed that when the results of 265 out of 266 polling stations were uploaded on RTS, he was leading by 312 votes and at the peak of results of PP-7 Rawalpindi-II, the RTS system broke down. He argued, “After a long time when the RTS system was restored, polling station number 63, 266th station was already uploaded and the PML(N) candidate won by a small margin of 49 votes.”
He also narrated the story of the proceedings before the RO, which he said was taken up for hearing the petition for recalculation instead of issuing notice under section 95(1) of the Act. He said the contesting candidates were told to wait for the declaration of results at 6:30 pm, but were then asked to leave at around 9:30 pm and would be informed about the order over the phone. RO rejected the application till late night as well as issued notice for consolidation of result.