Sohail Anwar Siyal submits reply in SHC in Iqama case

KARACHI: Peoples Party (PPP) MPA Sohail Anwar Siyal on Tuesday submitted a reply in the Sindh High Court on a petition seeking his disqualification for holding an Iqama (work permit).

A two-judge bench headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar heard petitions seeking disqualifications of Siyal, Faryal Talpur and Manzoor Wassan among others for holding Iqamas of certain countries and not disclosing them in their nomination papers.

As the hearing began, Election Commission of Pakistan's (ECP) law officer Abdullah Hunjra submitted his reply in court. Meanwhile, the petitioner's counsel, Shamsul Islam, said, “We are ready to conduct a case against Talpur and Siyal.”

However, the bench expressed disappointment at the ECP counsel’s response and said, “We have seen your reply and it says nothing. What is in a one-page reply, we know what work you are doing.”

Justice Ali further remarked, “We sought a detailed response and instead you submitted a one-page reply to simply fulfill your responsibility.”

“Are such replies submitted in court?” the bench further asked.

The petitioner's counsel then said that Talpur’s lawyer, Farooq H Naik, failed to appear in court for the hearing once again and contented that his junior should take the case forward. However, the bench said, “How can the case move forward when the lawyer is not present? Ask Farooq Naik to appear for the next hearing or we will separate his case.”

Advocate Shamsul Islam further said, “Talpur did not mention her Iqama or assets in Dubai in her reply. Till a verdict is announced, she should be disqualified from holding public office.” 

The petitioner had stated that Talpur established a company in her daughter Aisha’s name in 2002 and hid the details from the ECP in her nomination papers.

Further, the petitioner said that Talpur, Siyal and others were not Sadiq or Ameen as they had submitted fake affidavits.

Meanwhile, Sindh Assembly member Siyal also submitted a reply in the court today and said the petitioner is not a respondent and thus as per the Constitution he can only move the election tribunal. “The allegations leveled by the petitioner are false and baseless,” he added.

Further, Siyal said that he submitted all tax documents to the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR). “I have shared all details in my income tax returns,” he said.

“There was no column to state whether I hold an Iqama in the declaration form,” he further said in his reply.

The hearing of the petitions was then adjourned till October 25.