The returning officer (RO) in Lahore has requested the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) to provide detailed arguments regarding objections raised by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) over the nomination papers of PTI’s chairman, Imran Khan. These objections pertain to Imran’s candidacy for the NA-122 constituency in Lahore.
Mian Naseer, a former PML-N MPA and current contestant, lodged the objections with the RO. Naseer claimed that Imran Khan had been convicted in the Toshakhana case and that his nomination papers were not duly attested by the jail superintendent. Furthermore, Naseer argued that Imran’s seconder did not belong to the constituency from which Imran was contesting.
The RO’s office was crowded with PTI supporters, and heated arguments ensued between the counsels of both parties. Imran’s legal team urged the RO to dismiss the objections, stating that the seconders and proposers were indeed residents of the same constituency where Imran was contesting.
The objector’s counsel emphasized that their objections were not personal and highlighted the importance of the proposer and seconder being residents of the relevant constituency. They also pointed out that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had previously convicted Imran for five years, raising doubts about his eligibility to file nomination papers.
The PTI counsel informed the RO that an application challenging Imran’s disqualification was still pending before the Lahore High Court (LHC). The RO inquired whether the LHC had suspended the disqualification, to which the PTI counsel responded that the matter was still pending without any suspension.
The objector’s counsel claimed to possess substantial evidence supporting their argument that the proposer and seconder did not belong to the constituency. They also highlighted that these individuals had not signed the nomination papers in Imran’s presence. The PTI’s counsel suggested that the RO summon the concerned person to address this concern.
Amidst the proceedings, Imran’s supporters vocally expressed their support for him. Additionally, another lawyer raised objections against the objector, Naseer, alleging that he himself was not a resident of the constituency. Naseer’s counsel asserted that he indeed belonged to the constituency.
Imran’s counsel requested additional time until the following day to address the objections raised against his nomination. The RO granted this request, allowing the PTI to provide further clarification and address the concerns raised by the PML-N.
