Bewal Express
Test Star
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2005
- Runs
- 37,481
Qazi allowing the kidnapping and bribery of MNAs with this re-opening and overturning and allowing his own extension. What a corrupt thug he isArticle 63-A verdict apparently intended to weaken no-confidence motions: CJP Isa
Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa on Monday raised concerns over the inconsistent interpretation of Article 63-A, which governs the disqualification of lawmakers, during a Supreme Court hearing on review petitions related to the disqualification of defecting members of the National Assembly.
The chief justice called for adherence to the constitution’s text, emphasising the need for clarity in the application of the law.
Presiding over a five-member bench, Chief Justice Isa questioned the contradiction in rulings that suggest a lawmaker should be de-seated upon defection while also leaving it to Parliament to decide the duration of the disqualification.
"If the constitution clearly states that a disqualified member will be de-seated, then that is the action that must be followed," Isa said, highlighting that there should be no ambiguity in implementing the constitution’s provisions.
The case revolves around Article 63-A, which deals with the disqualification of members of Parliament for defying party directions during critical votes.
The Supreme Court is reviewing its earlier decision in the case, which ruled that the votes cast by dissident lawmakers would not be counted, and left it to Parliament to legislate on the duration of their disqualification.
PTI lawyer raises concerns over bench formation
The hearing began with Barrister Ali Zafar, representing the petitioner, raising objections to the formation of the bench.
He expressed concerns about the replacement of Justice Muneeb Akhtar with Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan in the five-member bench.
Chief Justice Isa assured the counsel that his concerns would be heard at a later stage in the proceedings, urging him to proceed with the arguments.
Chief Justice Isa also stressed that the Supreme Court is operating transparently, with no decisions being made behind closed doors.
"These days, nothing is happening behind closed doors in the Supreme Court. The larger bench is now complete, and we can begin the proceedings," he stated.
Contradictions in article 63-A interpretation
During the hearing, Chief Justice Isa pointed out a significant contradiction in the previous ruling.
He remarked that the decision to de-seat a lawmaker for defying party directions should be straightforward, but the involvement of Parliament in determining the disqualification period adds complexity.
He questioned how the decision-making process could be left to both the judiciary and Parliament, calling it a "clear contradiction."
"On one hand, the ruling states that a defecting member should be de-seated, but on the other hand, it allows Parliament to decide the length of disqualification.
This is contradictory," the Chief Justice said, urging that the constitution's wording should be the sole basis for such decisions.
Review of presidential reference
The case has its roots in the presidential reference filed by President Arif Alvi in March 2022, during the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government.
The reference sought the Supreme Court’s opinion on whether the votes cast by dissident lawmakers could be counted and whether their actions would lead to disqualification.
In response to the reference, a five-member Supreme Court bench, led by former Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, issued a verdict in May 2022.
The court ruled that the votes of dissident lawmakers should not be counted and that the Parliament could legislate on the period of their disqualification.
The decision was reached with a 3-2 majority, with Justices Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, Muneeb Akhtar, and the Chief Justice ruling in favour of the disqualification, while Justices Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Mazhar Alam Miankhel dissented.
Supreme Court divisions
The hearing also revealed the divisions within the Supreme Court over the interpretation of Article 63-A. Chief Justice Isa remarked that there has been growing criticism regarding how the Supreme Court is handling such sensitive matters.
Source: The Express Tribune