Imran Khan disqualified in Toshakhana reference

Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Friday disqualified PTI chief Imran Khan in the Toshakhana reference under Article 63(1)(p) for making “false statements and incorrect declaration”, triggering protests in various cities.

________________________________________

Key developments

• Decision taken unanimously by a five-member bench

• PTI leaders urge people to pour into the streets

• Protests reported from Lahore, Islamabad, Peshawar and Karachi

• Fawad Chaudhry says it’s a “slap on the face of 220m people”

• Imran lawyer Gohar Khan says ruling will be challenged in IHC “right now”

________________________________________

The written ruling, a few pages of which are available with Dawn.com, says the respondent had “intentionally and deliberately” violated the provisions contained [in] sections 137, 167 and 173 of the Elections Act, 2017, as he “has made false statement (sic) and incorrect declaration before the Commission in the statement of assets and liabilities filed by him for the year 2020-21”.

Hence, he attracts disqualification under Article 63(1)(p) of the Constitution read with sections 137 and 173 of the Elections Act, 2017, it added.

The ECP ruling follows up by saying based on the abovementioned findings, facts available on record and keeping in view the argument of learned counsel for parties herein, “we are of the considered opinion that the respondent has become disqualified under Article 63(1)(p) of the Constitution read with Section 137,167 and 173 of the Elections Act, 2017, consequently he ceases to be a member of the National Assembly of Pakistan and his seat has become vacant accordingly”.

The ruling said as the respondent “has made false statements and incorrect declaration”, therefore he has also committed the “offence of corrupt practices” defined under sections 167 and 173 of the Elections Act, 2017, punishable under Section 174 of the Elections Act, 2017.

“The office is directed to initiate legal proceedings and to take follow-up action under Section 190(2) of the Elections Act, 2017,” the verdict added.

Article 63 (1) (p) of the Constitution states that an individual is, “for the time being, disqualified from being elected or chosen as a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament) or of a provincial assembly under any law for the time being in force”.

Ambiguity over disqualification

Legal experts had widely interpreted this as Imran being disqualified till the end of the current National Assembly (NA) term.

As such, he has been de-seated as a member of the NA and by-polls could be held on the seat vacated following his disqualification.

However, one of Imran Khan’s lawyers, Gohar Khan told AFP that the ECP “has declared Imran Khan was involved in corrupt practices”, adding he had been disqualified for five years.

“We are going to challenge it in the Islamabad High Court right now.”

PTI leader Asad Umar also tweeted that the decision would be challenged in the courts as a “minus Imran would always remain a distant dream”.

Barrister Asad Rahim Khan told Dawn.com that it would be premature to comment without reading the order, given the current ambiguity around what provision Imran Khan was disqualified under.

“It is nonetheless a silly verdict — it would have been rendered meaningless under Article 62(1)(f), as the ECP isn’t a court of law,” he said.

“Left to the even more limited parameters of Article 63, the ECP’s decision can only be justified as part of the absurd sequence of events this country has seen since March, rather than any concrete reasoning of law.”

PTI’s official Twitter account, meanwhile, posted a photograph of a smiling Imran Khan holding his prayer beads, saying it was taken just moments before.

A four-member bench, headed by Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikander Sultan Raja, announced the verdict at the ECP Secretariat in Islamabad.

The decision was taken unanimously by the five-member bench. However, the member from Punjab was not present for today’s announcement.

According to the verdict, legal proceedings will be initiated against Imran for misdeclaration.

Law minister presser

Addressing a press conference in Islamabad, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar explained that in case there were objections to the conduct or election of an individual after their election, there were two remedies: approaching the election tribunal within 45 days of the election or disqualification as stated in Article 63-A beyond that period.

“The only remedy, in this case, was disqualification,” he said, accusing the PTI chief of taking “illegal steps” after his election.

The PML-N senator further maintained that all evidence in the case had been documentary, on the basis of which the ECP had found Imran involved in “corrupt practices”.

“The ECP has now referred his case for criminal proceedings against him in an appropriate court of law,” he added.

He also accused PTI “mobs of attacking cities” and consequently, creating trouble for people in the wake of the verdict. Lawmakers from the Pakistan Democratic Movement — the ruling alliance — had submitted the reference to National Assembly Speaker Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, who had subsequently forwarded it to Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Sikander Sultan Raja for further action.

Established in 1974, the Tosha¬khana is a department under the administrative control of the Cabinet Division and stores precious gifts given to rulers, parliamentarians, bureaucrats, and officials by heads of other governments and states and foreign dignitaries.

According to Toshakhana rules, gifts/presents and other such materials received by persons to whom these rules apply shall be reported to the Cabinet Division.

However, the PTI, while in government, had been reluctant to disclose details of the gifts presented to Imran since he assumed office in 2018, maintaining that doing so would jeopardise international ties, even as the Pakistan Infor-mation Commission (PIC) ordered it to do so.

But later, in a written reply submitted to the ECP on September 8, Imran had admitted to selling at least four presents he had received during his tenure as the prime minister.

The former premier, in his reply, had maintained that the sale of the gifts that he had procured from the state treasury after paying Rs21.56 million fetched about Rs58m.