Home Latest News ECP Rejects PTI’s Objections to Show-Cause Notice in Prohibited Funding Case

ECP Rejects PTI’s Objections to Show-Cause Notice in Prohibited Funding Case

Three-member bench resumes proceedings in case, with next hearing to take place on March 28

by Staff Report

YouTube

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Wednesday rejected a plea from the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) seeking the cross-examination of key witnesses in the prohibited funding case, and announced that it will proceed with the show-cause notice requiring the party to justify why legal action should not be taken for gross financial irregularities.

Announcing the verdict that had been reserved on Dec. 20, a three-member bench of the ECP headed by Chief Election Commissioner Sikandar Sultan Raja questioned the progress of the case in the Islamabad High Court (IHC), where the PTI had challenged the ECP’s earlier ruling.

“What was the IHC’s decision?” he asked of the PTI lawyer, who said it had directed the ECP to hear all parties. The CEC then noted that the ECP had not been barred from taking action and would take the case forward. Noting that the PTI had sought six weeks for arguments on Aug. 23, he said more than six months had now passed and it was time to seek records from abroad.

At this, the PTI’s counsel filed a plea to postpone the hearing for two weeks, however this was rejected. The ECP then adjourned the hearing till March 28.

The ECP had, in August 2022, found the PTI guilty of receiving prohibited funding, adding 13 previously unknown accounts had now come to light, which was a violation of Article 17 of the Constitution. The electoral body had also found that the PTI chief had submitted a false nomination form and the affidavit provided regarding party accounts was also inaccurate.

In its ruling, the ECP had issued a show-cause to the PTI to justify why further legal action should not be taken against it for gross financial irregularities. However, instead of responding to the show-cause, the PTI had filed a fresh application seeking cross-examination of key witnesses and also appealed the decision in the IHC.

Related Articles

Leave a Comment