Delimitations of constituencies: SHC to hear petitioners, ECP's arguments on May 28

Sindh High Court on Thursday sought the arguments from Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and petitioners in the case pertaining to delimitations of constituencies in Sindh on May 28, 2019 when the court would resume the hearing on it. Members National Assembly Ishan Mazari, Shabir Bijarani along with Rauf Khoso, Sheharyar Mehr and others challenged the delimitation of constituencies in Sindh and moved SHC against these by calling them unjust.
Barrister Haq Nawaz Talpur, counsel MNA Shabir Bijarani submitted before the court that his constituency has been delimited nineteen percent whereas ECP is empowered to do ten percent and is bound to explain the reasons for this ten percent. Counsel argued that ECP explained the changes in delimitations in provincial and national assemblies in the three provinces - Punjab, KPK & Balochistan - but in Sindh, no reasons were given for changes made in the delimitations in the province.
He contended that ECP treated province of Sindh like an orphan in delimitations of constituencies and prayed that ECP should be asked to explain the changes made in the delimitation of constituencies. While Hearing of petition against Nawaz Sharif. SHC on Thursday took up the petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI)'s leader Haleem Adil Sheikh against Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for his interview, which according to him Pakistan was blamed for Mumbai attacks on Indian soil.
Counsel of petitioner Barrister Jameel contended in the court that Nawaz Sharif committed the treason in his interview to a newspaper while talking about Mumbai attacks. Nawaz Sharif brought a bad name to the country, counsel stated while arguing for initiating the proceedings of treason against former prime minister. Justice K K Agha asked the counsel to read the interview of Nawaz Sharif in the court. After reading the statement of Nawaz Sharif loudly in the court, Barrister Jameel stated that this interview damaged the national security of the country.
Court asked the counsel whether they approached police for lodging FIR against Nawaz Sharif on the basis of this article? "Interior Ministry is controlled by the ruling party," counsel replied. About contention of counsel to try Nawaz Sharif under article 6 of the constitution, court inquired how this article can be applied to this case because article 6 deals with high treason cases and asked the petitioner why didn't he approached Ministry of Interior on violation of Article 6 of constitution.
Justice K K Agha remarked that counsel couldn't satisfy the court so far when Barrister Jameel argued for putting the name of Nawaz Sharif on ECL. Court put off the hearing for May 25 by directing the counsel of petitioner to come up with preparation on the case in the next hearing.