THE ECP continues to dither. Despite the issued to it about two weeks earlier, it is about how or whether the Supreme Court’s in the reserved seats case should be implemented. Having delayed implementing the ruling straight away when it was issued, it has now found a new excuse — a its rightful share of reserved seats, bulldozed through parliament in the month of August — behind which to take cover. ‘If the Supreme Court’s verdict is implemented, it would be a violation of the Elections (Second) Amendment Act of 2024; perhaps the apex court should clarify the effect of this new law in the interests of justice first,’ the ECP is now arguing. At the same time, it wants the Supreme Court to of its clarification order, issued on Sept 14, till all ‘confusion’ is cleared up. Further, it has cited a from National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq, which states that since the Supreme Court’s ruling is based on ‘an old law’, it no longer needs to be implemented. While the ECP has made a big show of its righteousness and respect for court rulings in its new petition, it has not explained why it reasoned that the detailed ruling issued by the Supreme Court goes against existing law. It is also strange for it to be relying so heavily on a letter issued by the Speaker to interpret what the new law states. Is the National Assembly Speaker judge and jury or a court of law that his word will now prevail over legal judgments? The question of 39 lawmakers by the ECP after the initial ruling as members of PTI’s parliamentary party also remains. What is their status now? Has the ECP accepted the Speaker’s letter as the word of the law and de-notified them? Those who have been observing the ECP’s conduct in these past few months believe that this fresh application for clarification has little to do with its respect for rules and procedures or concerns for democratic principles. They fear it is nothing more than a new ploy to buy both itself and parliament more time. They point to its refusal to implement the ruling in full when it was first released, which is what gave the government enough time to come up with new legislation aimed at rendering the verdict ineffective. Now, a ‘ ’ aimed at debilitating the judiciary is about to be , after which the possibility of such ‘inconveniences’ being raised by the courts will be forever put to bed. The ECP should stop playing games and take a clear position. It should not expect sympathy from the courts at this point.