The Supreme Court of Pakistan has observed that in a democracy, the general elections can neither be delayed nor derailed once the election programme has been announced.
It has further observed that delaying elections or prolonging legal disputes relating to them can undermine public confidence in the electoral process and democracy as a whole. Hence, once the election programme has been announced, it is important for any litigation or legal challenges related to elections to be resolved promptly.
The top court made these observations in a five-page order on a case wherein a judgement from the Balochistan High Court (BHC) dated December 12, 2023, was challenged. In the verdict, the BHC had declared the delimitation of two constituencies in Balochistan, including PB-I and PB-II, as void and of no legal consequence, thus requiring them to be redone.
Subsequently, the matter landed in the Supreme Court, and a three-judge bench, headed by Acting Chief Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah, heard the case.
The three-judge bench deliberated whether it should proceed with and immediately adjudicate upon the controversy of delimiting the two constituencies or should keep its hands off the matter at the moment and take it up for adjudication once the general elections have been conducted so that the electoral process, set in motion, has been successfully completed without any hindrance.
“Because of the crucial stage of the election process, we are of the considered view that holding of general elections is far more imperative and should be prioritized over the delimitation of constituencies,” read the order, which has been authored by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah.
Justice Shah has further observed that holding timely elections in the two constituencies is more important than insisting upon proper delimitation.
“Therefore, it is best that the court lays its hands off this matter for the time being till the general elections are successfully completed,” the top court said, further ruling that the controversy surrounding the delimitation of the two constituencies shall be decided after the elections and that it would be looked into only for the purpose of future general elections if they are conducted on the basis of the population census of 2023.
“If we proceed to adjudicate upon the issue of delimitation of the constituencies before us, thereby re-examining or altering the notified constituencies by the ECP under challenge, we will invariably upset the timeline of the Election Programme and derail the electoral process already set afoot by the Election Programme announced on December 15, 2023.”
Justice Shah has further observed that any intervention by this court in revisiting the contours of delimitation of a constituency completed by the ECP at this stage will open the floodgates for similar litigation, resulting in the choking of the election process.
“Therefore, proceeding with this case at this stage when the electoral clock has started ticking, would undermine democracy and adversely affect the fundamental right to vote and form a political government of millions of voters and political workers countrywide.”
The court observed the importance of holding elections in a democracy, and the fulfilment of the larger objective of holding a timely election should be given due consideration to ensure that the court remains within its democratic remit, which in the case at hand, necessitates organising and conducting of free, fair and timely elections by the ECP.
“It is well-established in democratic systems that general elections are the cornerstone of representative governance, ensuring the people's right to choose their leaders and influence policy decisions," it said, adding, “The periodic conduct of these elections is not merely a procedural necessity but a fundamental principle upholding the democratic ethos."
On the issue of delimitation, the court observed that the delimitation of a constituency, although significant for ensuring fair and effective representation, does not hold the same immediacy or overriding importance as the conduct of general elections.
“Delimitation, by its nature, is a detailed and often prolonged exercise, aimed at creating constituencies that reflect current demographic realities. While this is undoubtedly important for the health of a democratic system, it is not so critical that it should impede the timely conduct of general elections.”
The court warned that postponing general elections to address constituency delimitations could lead to a vacuum in governance and a potential crisis of legitimacy. "Such a situation would be antithetical to the principles of democracy and the larger good of the populace.”
“Therefore, the principle of proportionality and the concept of the larger good demands that general elections be given primacy,” it said, adding that issues concerning the delimitation of constituencies, while important, should be addressed after the elections.
“This approach ensures the continuity of democratic governance and upholds the fundamental rights of the electorate while still acknowledging the need for eventual and necessary adjustments in constituency boundaries.”