Government suggests the possibility of postponing elections, inspired by the Lahore High Court's directive.

On Thursday, the Caretaker Federal Minister of Information and Broadcasting, Murtaza Solangi, suggested the potential postponement of the upcoming general elections. This hint emerged as the 54-day mandatory campaigning period for the February 8, 2024 polls commenced on December 16. However, the three-day training for officers overseeing electoral activities faced a halt due to a Lahore High Court order prompted by a petition from the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

The interim information minister clarified that the government was prepared to offer financial, administrative, and security support to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). Despite the government's readiness, the ECP had to suspend the training of returning officers (ROs) following the LHC's decision just before the electoral body was set to announce the election schedule.

The Lahore High Court, responding to a PTI petition, ruled in favor of the party, challenging the appointment of district returning officers (DROs), ROs, and assistant returning officers (AROs) from the Punjab bureaucracy for the general polls. The PTI sought the court's assistance in appointing judicial officers as ROs.

Solangi expressed concern over the setback caused by the court's decision, emphasizing that the caretaker government maintained its stance on holding timely elections. He hoped for a resolution from the ECP and the judiciary regarding the issue.

Although not explicitly naming the PTI, Solangi attributed the attempt to delay the polls to a political party, suggesting that the ECP was progressing swiftly until hurdles were created. This situation led to a surprising alignment where the interim government, mainstream political parties, and the ECP accused the PTI of attempting to delay the general elections.

PML-N president Shehbaz Sharif accused the PTI of conspiring to postpone the elections, describing it as an attempt to sabotage people's representation. He alleged a double standard, where the PTI was simultaneously demanding and challenging the election schedule.

In response, PTI lawyer Barrister Abuzar Salman Niazi defended the party's stance, pointing out concerns about biased officials appointed as DROs and ROs. He argued that the PTI sought judicial officers for these roles to ensure fair elections and prevent interference by compromised bureaucracy.

Niazi maintained that the PTI was actively pursuing timely and independent elections, ready to present its case in court for a swift resolution. Despite the accusations and counter-accusations, the lawyer emphasized the PTI's commitment to timely elections in Pakistan.