| Case ID |
f6e78d17-1d65-47b9-9103-b3d7085ad594 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
D-2741 of 2016 |
| Decision Date |
|
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The decision held that the candidate could not be disqualified for not disclosing assets not required by the law at the time of filing nomination papers. The court emphasized that the provisions of the Sindh Local Government Act, 2013 and the associated rules do not mandate the disclosure of complete assets at the time of nomination submission. Instead, candidates are required to disclose their assets only after taking an oath of office, within a specified timeframe. The court found no basis for rejecting the nomination papers based on incomplete asset disclosure, as the law does not necessitate such information at the time of filing. The court dismissed the constitutional petition, affirming the appellate authority's decision to accept the nomination papers of the respondent. |
| Summary |
In the case concerning the Sindh Local Government Act, the Sindh High Court addressed the issue of asset disclosure requirements for candidates during local council elections. The court ruled that candidates are not mandated to disclose complete assets when submitting nomination papers, as the law stipulates that such disclosures are only required after taking an oath of office. This ruling clarifies the interpretation of sections 23 and 36 of the Sindh Local Government Act and Rule 18 of the associated election rules, emphasizing that disqualification on the grounds of incomplete asset disclosure is not permissible under current legislation. The decision is significant for candidates, advocates, and legal practitioners involved in electoral politics, as it reinforces the legal protections afforded to candidates regarding asset disclosures. The ruling is expected to have implications for future election processes and candidate eligibility standards, ensuring that candidates are not unduly penalized for non-disclosure of assets that the law does not require at the nomination stage. Legal representatives and electoral bodies should note this precedent when evaluating candidate qualifications and compliance with electoral regulations. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI,
ABDUL MAALIK GADDI
|
| Lawyers |
Arbab Ali Hakro,
Imdad Ali R. Unar,
Jhamat Jehtanand
|
| Petitioners |
KHALID AHMED MEMON
|
| Respondents |
2 OTHERS,
DEEN MUHAMMAD TALPUR
|
| Citations |
2016 SLD 3629,
2016 MLD 1527
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Sindh Local Government Act (XLII of 2013),
Sindh Local Councils (Election) Rules, 2013
|
| Sections |
23,
36,
R.18
|