The Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT) has issued a report detailing its assessment of the recently-concluded general election, expressing deep concerns over a decline in fairness scores compared to previous election cycles.
Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial on Thursday advised PTI lawmakers to "return to the National Assembly" as the Supreme Court (SC) gave the party another chance to prepare its case against the phase-wise acceptance of resignations from the lower house of parliament. "People have elected [PTI lawmakers] for five years.
The party should play its role in parliament. Playing a due role in parliament is the actual obligation," the CJP remarked during the hearing of a plea challenging the Islamabad High Court's (IHC) dismissal of the party's plea challenging the "piecemeal" acceptance of resignations by NA Speaker Raja Pervaiz Ashraf.
Lawmakers from the party had resigned en masse from the NA on April 11, following the ouster of party chief Imran Khan as the premier through a no-confidence motion. Then-NA deputy speaker Qasim Suri, in the capacity of the house' acting speaker, had subsequently accepted the resignations of 123 PTI MNAs.
However, the incumbent speaker had later decided to to verfiy the resignations and eventually, accepted the resignations of just 11 lawmakers on July 27.
The PTI had challenged the move in the IHC on August 1, contesting that it was "unsustainable". The IHC, however, dimissed the petition on September 6 and declared that the acceptance of PTI lawmakers’ resignations by Suri was unconstitutional.
The PTI then approached the SC, praying it to set aside the IHC order, terming it "vague, cursory and against the law".
A two-member bench of the SC, comprising CJP Badial and Justice Justice Ayesha Malik, took up the PTI's plea today and observed that the IHC order clearly stated that the phase-wise acceptance of resignations by the NA speaker had a legal standing.
Apparently, the bench further observed, "interfering in the NA speaker's authority could affect Article 69" of the Constitution. Article 69 of the Constitution essentially restricts the court's jurisdiction to exercise authority on a member or officer of parliament with respect to the functions of regulating parliamentary proceedings or conducting business.
The bench added that such meddling in the speaker's functions was a "very difficult task for the court". It then asked the PTI's lawyer to "satisfy the court as to what was lacking in the high court's order".
The party's counsel, Faisal Chaudhry, contended that Suri had initially accepted the resignations of all 123 PTI MNAs. "Once resignations are accepted, they cannot be verified again," he argued.
At that, the CJP commented: "The intention behind Qasim Suri's decision seemed to be the same as the one behind his ruling on the no-confidence motion."
Moreover, Justice Malik pointed out that Suri's decision did not mention the name of any lawmaker whose resignation was accepted. She also questioned how the PTI could approach the court as a whole when tendering a resignation was an individual act.
Advising PTI lawmakers to "return to the National Assembly", the CJP remarked that the nation had been badly affected by the catastrophic floods. "They have neither water to drink nor food to eat."
Noting that individuals from abroad were also visiting the country to help with relief, he added: "Consider the country's economic situation as well."
Comments
Post a Comment