ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court’s seven-member constitutional bench, led by Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, on Monday dismissed a petition seeking to declare candidates with more than 50% of votes as automatically successful in elections. The bench also imposed a Rs20,000 fine on the petitioner, Advocate Chaudhry Akram, for filing a “frivolous” petition.
During the hearing, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar questioned the constitutional basis for requiring candidates to secure 50% of the vote to win, emphasizing that election outcomes are determined by the votes cast rather than arbitrary thresholds.
Justice Ayesha Malik also inquired which fundamental rights of the petitioner had been violated, stating that the court did not have the authority to create new laws. The petitioner argued that Parliament, not the judiciary, should decide on such matters, but Justice Khan pointed out that Parliament does not have the power to impose such decisions unilaterally.
Justice Musarrat Hilali remarked that although everyone has the right to vote, many citizens often choose not to participate, and that lack of voter turnout is not a legal issue. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail also questioned the petitioner about whether he had voted in the February 2024 elections, with the petitioner admitting he had not—leading Justice Mandokhail to call this disrespectful to the Constitution.
In response, the bench imposed the fine and dismissed the petition, while also rejecting the petitioner’s suggestion of levying a Rs100 billion fine to reduce the national debt, given his inability to pay such an amount.
The bench also heard another petition, this time concerning the mandatory affiliation of independent candidates with political parties. The petitioner, appearing via video link, acknowledged that the matter had already been resolved, and the bench subsequently dismissed the petition on the grounds that it was no longer relevant.
Further, the court addressed a case challenging the Income Levy Tax Act 2013, where the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) confirmed that notices had not been issued to around 400 parties due to incorrect addresses. The court ordered that notices be published in newspapers to ensure compliance.
Looking ahead, the Supreme Court is set to hear several other important cases in the coming days, including a challenge to the Sindh Local Government Act, 2013, petitions concerning the 2017 population census, child trafficking, the state of public schools in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and more.
