Reserved seats case
| Reserved Seats Case | |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Full case name | Sunni Ittehad Council through its Chairman, Faisalabad and another v. Election Commission of Pakistan through its Secretary, Islamabad and others |
| Decided | July 12, 2024 |
| Citation | |
| Case history | |
| Prior actions |
|
| Appealed from | Peshawar High Court |
| Appealed to | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Outcome | |
| All PTI-backed independents allowed to join the PTI’s parliamentary party, rather than having to use SIC as a parliamentary vehicle. PTI given their share of reserved seats. Rulings of Election Commission and Peshawar High Court declared null and void. | |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Qazi Faez Isa, Mansoor Ali Shah, Munib Akhtar, Yahya Afridi, Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha Malik, Athar Minallah, Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Shahid Waheed, Irfan Saadat Khan, Naeem Akhtar Afghan |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, joined by Munib Akhtar, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha Malik, Athar Minallah, Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Shahid Waheed, Irfan Saadat Khan |
Sunni Ittehad Council, Faisalabad, etc. v Election Commission of Pakistan, informally referred to as the Reserved seats case, was a court case which involved the high bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP), notably comprising Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and several other high justices. In this case, Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) challenged the Pakistani Election Commission's decision of not giving allocated reserve seats in the National Assembly, Punjab Assembly, Sindh Assembly, and KPK assembly for women and minorities to SIC members, as the ECP gave the seats to other parties, claiming the party failed to meet the January 24 deadline for the submission of candidates. On 12 July the court nullified the Election Commissions order and PHC verdict, terming it "unconstitutional" and ordering the PTI to submit a list of candidates. However, the National Assembly did not implement the decision and the ECP objected to the ruling.