AJK Commission Leaves Rathore LA-17 Victory Intact After Split Vote

The Azad Jammu and Kashmir Election Commission has left Prime Minister Raja Faisal Mumtaz Rathore's LA-17 victory in place after rejecting two challenges by a two-to-one majority. The split decision sends the central factual disputes toward an election tribunal rather than resolving them through an immediate recount or recompilation.

The petitions were filed separately by PML-N candidate Chaudhry Mohsin Aziz and independent candidate Khawaja Tariq Saeed. Both questioned polling-station records and the consolidated result in the Haveli constituency.

Why the majority rejected the applications

Chief Election Commissioner Justice retired Ghulam Mustafa Mughal and senior member Muhammad Ahsen concluded that the allegations required evidence, examination of records and testimony that an election tribunal is designed to handle.

The majority said a recount under Section 66(5) of the Elections Act normally requires a written challenge at the relevant stage and satisfaction by the returning officer, unless the commission itself orders one. It noted that objections had not been raised when results were read out and consolidated in front of polling agents and journalists.

The commissioners also said the allegations did not fit the limited use of Section 9, which permits intervention over grave illegality materially affecting polling. Once the returned candidate had been notified, they viewed a regular petition under Section 81 as the appropriate remedy.

That reasoning preserves Rathore's notification but does not declare every disputed form authentic. It means the chosen forum for deciding those claims is the tribunal.

What the petitioners alleged

Aziz alleged differences between Forms-24 given to his polling agents and the figures used by the returning officer. He claimed 1,133 votes were removed from his total and 3,095 added to Rathore through fabricated statements of count. He also alleged no polling occurred at two stations and requested recompilation and recounting.

The returning officer rejected those assertions. He said polling continued from 8am to 5pm on August 10 without a complaint against presiding officers. According to his response, sealed bags and original forms reached his office under security, and the documents were signed and untampered when results were consolidated.

Saeed raised similar concerns, alleging that his votes were reduced while Rathore's increased. He also referred to violence involving a polling agent and expressed concern that disputed documents could be placed in polling bags.

These remain competing claims. Reporting them accurately requires attributing each assertion rather than treating either side's account as proven.

The dissent took a different view

Commission member Syed Nazeerul Hassan Gillani dissented in both cases. He said original Forms-24 produced by polling agents showed meaningful discrepancies when compared with records submitted to the returning officer.

Gillani wanted the results from identified polling stations recompiled using forms supplied at the polling place, along with any other station where a clear contradiction existed. His opinion argued that the commission possessed broad authority to protect transparent elections.

The dissent is important because it identifies a substantive disagreement inside the commission, not merely dissatisfaction from losing candidates. Under the applicable rules, however, the majority decision controls.

What happens next

The petitioners can take their evidence to an election tribunal, where original documents can be summoned, presiding officers examined and rival forms tested through cross-examination. That process is slower than an administrative recount but offers a fuller evidentiary hearing.

The dispute will remain politically sensitive because Rathore is the sitting AJK prime minister. Public confidence will depend on a process that is both open and timely. Delayed decisions can leave constituencies represented for long periods while the legality of the result remains contested.

For now, the Rathore LA-17 election challenge has not changed the declared winner. The commission's majority preserved the result while leaving the petitioners a judicial route to prove their allegations. The tribunal, if approached, will have to decide whether the conflicting Forms-24 reflect error, misconduct or an unsupported claim.

This Novexa News report is based on the AJK Election Commission's majority and dissenting decisions as reported by Dawn.