SC takes exception to British envoy’s remarks about Pakistan elections

 (Web Desk) – The Supreme Court has condemned the recent remark of British High Commissioner to Pakistan Jane Marriot, which targeted the country’s general election in February 2024.

Marriot, speaking at the Asma Jahangir conference last month, expressed alarm over Pakistan’s February 8 elections, citing British Foreign Secretary David Cameron.

“…not all parties were formally permitted to contest the elections and that legal processes were used to prevent some political leaders from participation, and to prevent the use of recognisable party symbols,” the top British envoy had said.

She went on to say that “open societies” are transparent, thus Pakistan’s government, civil society, and international players should work to build “open societies” and “vibrant democracies.”

SC Letter to Envoy

In a letter to the envoy, the registrar of the Supreme Court indicated that her criticism of a certain political party being marginalized by having its election emblem removed was unfounded since it did not follow the law.

According to the letter, elections must take place within 90 days of the national and provincial assembly’ terms ending.

However, it did not occur because then-President Arif Alvi and the ECP were at disagreement over who had the authority to announce the election date.

“The matter was resolved in just 12 days by the Supreme Court, and general elections were held throughout Pakistan on 8 February 2024,” remarked the registrar.

The registrar stated that the law passed by Parliament (Elections Act, 2017) mandates democracy within political parties through the holding of intra-party elections.

It said that if a political party does not undertake intra-party elections, it will be ineligible for an election symbol.

“A political party (which had voted for this law) did not hold the required intra-party elections. “The Supreme Court reiterated what the law required,” the letter stated.

As a result, the registrar stated: “Your Excellency’s criticism of this decision, with all due respect, was unjustified.”