ڈسکہ الیکشن۔ سپریم کودٹ کا فیصلہ
There is no cavil with the proposition that ECP is empowered under Article 218(3) of the Constitution read with Section 9 of the Elections Act, 2017 (“Act”) to ensure that elections are conducted honestly, justly, fairly and lawfully in such a manner that coercion, intimidation and pressure tactics are stymied. However, the question before us is: what standard of proof, quantum of evidence, scale and severity of violations of law will warrant a re-poll in the entire constituency. As it presently stands, Section 9 ibid operates in a very limited span of sixty days following the publication of the result of an election. The jurisdiction of ECP under the said provision partakes of executive and quasi-judicial powers that may be exercised promptly to cure any irregularity in the conduct of an election. Therefore, the benchmarks laid down by the law for the Election Tribunal to annul an election and order a re-poll may not strictly apply to the ECP under the said Section without suitable modification. In such circumstances we would like to examine whether the impugned action of the ECP, namely, its allegedly excessive response to the prevailing situation in Daska was within its jurisdictional parameters. The learned counsel for the parties have so far not analyzed the extensive material on record to relate the same to the powers and jurisdiction of the ECP under the Constitution and the Act. In particular, the following questions have not been addressed:
a. What transgressions on the polling day could constitute grave illegalities or violations calling for a fresh rather than a partial re-poll?
b. In what situations would non-pervasiveness of the illegalities or violations committed on polling day still attract the same result?
0 Comments