ISLAMABAD(National times)- The Supreme Court of Pakistan has issued its long-awaited 47-page detailed verdict on the reserved seats case, ruling that Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was granted relief despite not being a party to the proceedings – a move the apex court declared unsustainable in law. The judgment, authored by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, also carried dissenting notes from Justice Ayesha A Malik and Justice Aqeel Abbasi. A separate note from Justice Salahuddin Panhwar explained his withdrawal from the bench. The Court had initially announced its decision on 27 June after accepting review petitions, but the full text of the judgment has only now been made public. According to the ruling, only a constitutional bench has the authority to hear review petitions. In this instance, a 13-member bench was constituted, with 11 judges issuing notices to parties and legal representatives. Two judges dissented and dismissed the review petitions, while two others refrained from participating in the final decision. The Court clarified that PTI was not a party before any judicial or electoral forum, including the Supreme Court, the Peshawar High Court, and the Election Commission of Pakistan. Despite this, relief was granted in the main judgment. The verdict declared that offering such relief to a non-party contravenes established legal norms. The judgment highlighted that out of 80 independent candidates elected, none declared themselves as PTI nominees or sought reserved seats on that basis. The Election Commission subsequently distributed those reserved seats among other political parties. The Court ruled that de-seating such members without giving them the opportunity to be heard violated principles of fairness.

Supreme Court detailed verdict categorically declares PTI eligible for reserved seats

It was further noted that the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) and its leadership did not act responsibly in the matter, with their lawyer submitting delaying applications and failing to file a review petition. PTI candidates, the verdict added, misunderstood earlier orders of the Court, wrongly assuming they endorsed PTI’s entitlement to reserved seats. The Supreme Court emphasised that its powers under Article 184 cannot be invoked to grant relief to a non-party and reiterated that it cannot “rewrite” the Constitution during interpretation. The verdict sharply criticised the exclusion of minority judges from the bench that initially heard the matter, calling it unconstitutional and without precedent. The order further clarified that the Court had never ruled against PTI’s participation in elections. While several prominent lawyers contested polls as PTI representatives, no challenge was raised to the declarations treating them as independent candidates. The ruling reaffirmed that extending judicial relief without proper legal standing undermines both the judicial process and constitutional limits.