During the hearing of the petition regarding the reserved seats of the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) in the Supreme Court on Thursday, the court said that it upheld the decision of the election commission, but did not say the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) should be excluded from the elections.

Nor did the Supreme Court meant to exclude the PTI from elections, it remarked.

A full court of the SC, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, heard the petition related to the reserved seats of the SIC, in which the lawyers of the party and the election commission appeared in court.

During the hearing, election commission lawyer Sikander Bashir said that Hamid Raza of the SIC had said in his nomination papers that he was associated with the SIC and the PTI, but in the documents he said he was affiliated with the PTI-Nazariati.

The PTI-Nazariati is a different political party, which is not related to the PTI.

Lawyer Sikander Bashir argued that Hamid Raza was allotted the symbol of tower to contest the elections on his own request and he contested elections as an independent candidate. Justice Jamal Mandokhel remarked Hamid Raza did not mention in the Urdu documents that he wanted to contest as an independent candidate.

The ECP lawyer questioned how Hamid Raza cannot call himself an independent candidate when he submitted a certificate of affiliation with the PTI but after taking oath said he was a member of the PTI-Nazariati. The commission implemented Raza's last request.

Justice Muneeb Akhtar asked which political party Hamid Raza associated himself with, and sought the record. Justice Mandokhel asked that after withdrawing nomination papers, if a candidate could say he wanted to leave a party and get the ticket of another.

Also Read: Govt moves SC to quash Sunni Ittehad Council's plea for reserved seats

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah inquired whether the returning officers possessed the party certificate attached with the nomination papers. "We have a case of nomination papers before us," he remarked.

CJP Isa said that if a person wants to get married, the consent of the girl is also necessary. "Isn't it necessary to attach a certificate of affiliation to a party from which the election has to be contested? What does the law say about the PTI-Nazariati certificate and the PTI's declaration of cancellation?"

Upon this, the ECP lawyer said the candidate's declaration and affiliation with a party must be proved. If the declaration and political affiliation did not match, he is considered an independent candidate and this was the easiest way for returning officers, he added.

The CJP asked if a candidate could be excluded from the elections. "There is no contradiction in the certificates. The election commission is changing the status of a candidate. Why is the candidate of a party whose certificate is being submitted not being considered?"

Justice Yahya Afridi asked if it has happened that a candidate claims to belong to a party and even submits a certificate, but the election commission declares him an independent candidate? The ECP lawyer said there were such candidates but they withdrew their nomination papers.

Justice Ayesha Malik asked the ECP lawyer why they declared candidates independent when they were calling themselves affiliated with a political party? Confusion started as to what a candidate can do if he did not get the ticket of a party. "The election commission declared them independent candidates."

Justice Akhtar remarked that it is not a matter of one candidate but of the PTI, which is a national party. The election commission told the PTI it would not get its bat symbol, and the Supreme Court upheld the decision. But the SC did not say the PTI should be excluded from the elections, nor was it the court's intention to exclude the party from elections, he added.

The chief justice remarked that either give the bat symbol to someone else, because the ECP has reserved it and an independent candidate can also get the bat symbol. If someone misinterprets the Supreme Court's decision, there is no remedy. "Why is a candidate not considered a member of the PTI? It is incomprehensible."

Also Read: Important question is on what basis ECP declared PTI candidates as independent: SC judge

Justice Akhtar said that it was so easily said that if a candidate did not get an election symbol, he is declared as an independent candidate. "How did you take such a big decision? Did the election commission discuss this issue or leave it to the mercy of the returning officers?" he questioned.

Justice Mandokhel asked, "Does the election commission have the authority to declare a candidate independent? Under what law can the ECP declare someone an independent candidate?"

On this, Justice Malik said: "A candidate is saying he is affiliated with a certain political party but the ECP says no, you are an independent candidate. The candidate did not say he is an independent candidate."

Justice Minallah asked if it should be believed the PTI was excluded from elections and the election commission misinterpreted the SC decision? The bench is saying that the election commission misinterpreted the Supreme Court decision, he added.

Justice Afridi said six candidates submitted certificates and declarations of the same party, but they were all declared independent candidates by the election commission. Later, the Supreme Court adjourned further hearing of the case till July 1.