ISLAMABAD: The foreign passport that PTI leader Vawda submitted to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) as proof of the renunciation of his US nationality was already expired, the Supreme Court observed on Wednesday.
The observation was made by Justice Ayesha Malik, who was part of a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and also comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, hearing Vawda’s appeal against his disqualification for life under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.
In February, the ECP disqualified Vawda for concealing his US citizenship and directed him to return the salary and other benefits he had received as a minister and as a member of the National Assembly, within two months. It had also de-notified him as a senator. During today’s hearing, his lawyer contended that the returning officer (RO) had seen Vawda’s cancelled passport.
“But the cancelled passport that you are relying on was expired,” noted Justice Malik. She said the cancelled passport was submitted to the RO in 2018, but it had expired in 2015. “When you get a new passport made, the older one is stamped as cancelled,” Justice Malik added. “How can a cancelled passport be proof of renunciation of a nationality?” she asked.
Moreover, she noted that the passport numbers of the one on record and the one cancelled were different. “It is evident by different numbers that a new passport was issued after being long overdue,” she said. Following her observations, the CJP remarked that this matter had become “very serious”. Justice Masoor commented that “another of Vawda’s lies is out in the open”.
Vawda’s lawyer then contended that the text of the affidavit — which Vawda had submitted at the time of the filing of his nomination papers for a National Assembly constituency — elaborated that the PTI leader did not hold the passport of another country.
At that, Justice Shah said the mention of the “passport in the affidavit meant having the nationality of another country”. The lawyer then argued that the ECP did not have the authority to disqualify a person for life. But the high court does have the authority to disqualify an individual for life, replied Justice Shah. Vawda’s lawyer sought more time from the court for preparation.
At that, the court adjourned the hearing, with Justice Shah commenting, “You will not have answers to these questions even next week.” The confirmed date of the next hearing is yet to be issued. – Agencies
