The Supreme Court rejects the petition regarding the voting threshold in elections and levies a fine.

The Supreme Court’s Constitutional Bench has rejected a petition that sought to require candidates to obtain more than 50% of votes in order to be declared victorious in an election.

The petitioner, Muhammad Akram, was additionally penalized with a fine of Rs. 20,000 for submitting the petition.

A seven-member panel, presided over by Justice Aminuddin Khan, adjudicated the case. During the hearings, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar interrogated the rationale for necessitating 50% of votes as stipulated by the Constitution, underscoring that electoral results are dictated by the votes cast. He inquired, “What occurs if voters choose not to participate?”

Justice Ayesha Malik questioned which fundamental rights of the petitioner had been infringed and which constitutional provisions were purportedly contravened. She emphasized that the authority to legislate resides with Parliament, not the judiciary.

The petitioner contended that all fundamental rights are interconnected with his plea, asserting that Parliament determines the trajectory of citizens’ life. Justice Aminuddin Khan objected, asserting, “Parliament does not determine life; it offers representation.”

Justice Musarrat Hilali commented on voter indifference, observing that numerous individuals opt to remain at home on election day, which she described as a “weakness of voters.” The petitioner acknowledged his failure to vote in the February 2024 election, leading Justice Jamal Mandukhel to admonish him, stating, “You are once again disrespecting the Constitution.”

The petitioner facetiously proposed a penalty of Rs. 100 billion to alleviate the nation’s debt, to which Justice Aminuddin Khan replied, “That is not your prerogative to determine.”

The decision underscored significant concerns regarding electoral engagement and judicial constraints in constitutional issues.