ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) Cha­ir­man Gohar Ali Khan app­roached the Supreme Court on Saturday, seeking a direction that letters from the National and Punjab Assembly speakers do not reflect the correct constitutional and legal position. He argued that the top court’s July 12 short order on reserved seats should not be disregarded by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and must be implemented, as clarified by the court’s Sept 14 clarification order issued by an eight-judge bench. In its Sept 14 clarification, the bench, led by senior puisne judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, rebuked the ECP for failing to implement the July 12 judgement regarding the reserved seats. The order affirmed that 41 of the 80 returned MNAs were PTI members and part of the party’s parliamentary group in both the National and provincial assemblies. On Saturday, the PTI chairman filed an application with the Sup­reme Court, explaining that the party was petitioning the apex court following a letter sent by the National Assembly speaker to the ECP on Sept 19. PTI says changes to Elections Act 2024 have no bearing on reserved seats order In the letter, the speaker conte­n­ded that, in light of recent amendments to the Elections Act 2017, thr­o­ugh the Elections (Second Amendment) Act 2024, the top court’s July 12 order was no longer applicable. A similar letter was written by the Punjab Assembly speaker to the ECP, the PTI application said, adding that both letters were deliberate attempts to obstruct the im­p­lementation of the July 12 order and failed to consider the clarification issued on Sept 14. The application emphasised that the Elections (Second Amendment) Act 2024 had no bearing on the binding nature of the July 12 short order, and the ECP could not refuse to implement it on the basis of the new law. Moreover, the letters from the two speakers did not accurately represent the constitutional and legal position and, therefore, had no legal effect, the petition contended. As per the July 12 short order, the affiliation of the 80 returned MNAs had been definitively resolved, the PTI application stated. It added that the Sept 14 clarification order reiterated that these candidates “were and are the returned candidates of PTI for all constitutional and legal purposes”, and “no subsequent acts” could alter this position. The application further argued that the constitutio­nal position, once establi­shed, could not be modified by ordinary legislation, such as the Elections Amen­d­ment Act. Any law that contradicts the Constitu­t­ion, as interpreted by the Sup­reme Court, could be cha­llenged even in collateral legal proceedings, it said. The application stress­­ed that the Constitution’s auth­o­rity reigns supreme and no one should be allowed to violate its provisions. Considering the ECP’s alleged prejudice towards PTI and its perceived reluctance to implement the Supreme Court’s July 12 order — an issue recognised in the Sept 14 clarification — the PTI fears that the ECP may use the letters from the speakers to wrongfully refuse compliance with the order and would instead declare PTI’s returned candidates as independents, allocating reserved seats to other political parties.