ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial on Monday asked the petitioners to explain how and convince the Supreme Court that the April 3 decision of National Assembly Vice Speaker Kasim Suri on in no-confidence resolution against in prime minister was illegal.
Judge Muneeb Akhtar observed that in the House of Representatives, the Vice Speaker went beyond his remit by ruling on petition for no confidence.
To read: Detailed ruling refers to opposition’s ‘nexus’ with foreign powers
bandial CJP, who presided over over five more judges bench who took up suo motu notice of case, as well as of petitions filed various hand, noticed that it appears that the issue of illegality in innings of the no-confidence motion could have been considered earlier, but as soon as permission of in house was granted, then stage of objection passed.
Closing the hearing on Monday, the CJP questioned why members of the opposition failed to be present at the meeting of parliamentary committee on national security during which the content of “threatening letter” was circulated with parliamentarians.
CJP looking for arguments on how Suri’s decision on lack of trust is “illegal”; asks why the opposition did not come to the meeting of the parliamentary committee
former law minister Senator Farouk H. Naek representing PPP, PML-N and JUI-F in joint petition emphasizing the urgency of case and asked the court to dismiss up a business on Monday as President Dr. Arif Alvi issued a notice demanding that Imran Khan continue to serve as Interim Acting prime minister pursuant to section 224A(4) of Constitution.
However, the case was adjourned until today (Tuesday), when PPP Senator Raza Rabbani and senior counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan will present his arguments and the court is likely to announce its decision. decision.
At the beginning of hearing, Mr. Naek asked the CJP that, although it was his prerogative, to draw up bench, in view of Serious emergency and public meaning, judgment should consider establishing full a court consisting of all the judges how it was done in in past.
At the same time, CJP reported counsel what if he didn’t have confidence in any member of the bench the court would rise adding that full the yard was a luxury even in times last two years “we have suffered since 10,000 cases have accumulated because of 63 hearings in case of Judge Kazi Faez Isa by 10 judges bench”.
Faruk Naek stressed that on day of voting on in no-confidence the movement was to be held during the National Assembly session on April 3 charges could not be filed against opposition, invoking article 5 of A constitution that requires loyalty to the state. Vote on no-confidence motion against the prime minister was different from impeachment of the president where the charge was announced first.
counsel argued that a motion of no confidence had been filed on March 8 together with requisition for convocation of the National Assembly session under article 54(3) of Constitution within 14 days – a period that has expired on March 21.
On March 25, the Vice Speaker convened session and postponed it until March 28, when a Motion of No Confidence was filed and permission was granted by the Vice Speaker and a vote on movement was fixed for April 3rd.
counsel said former law minister Fawad Chaudhry made short speech on “threatening letter” allegedly received from a foreign country, and immediately after that, the vice speaker read out decision to suspend the meeting session without any vote consider.
Mr. Naek emphasized that the Vice Speaker’s decision was taken without discussion, adding that a simple reading of Rule 28 of regulations of procedure and behavior of Business in The National Assembly proposed that only the Speaker could give ruling, as the deputy speaker was simply the presiding officer.
counsel claimed that at the time of The resolutions were sat by 198 deputies, including 175 representatives of the opposition. in assembly hall, and that the decision is tantamount to condemnation in absentia of members who signed a motion of no confidence as “traitors”.
Judge Jamal Khan Mandokhel asked when April 3 session It was fixed for but vote on motion of no confidence, whether any other matter can be discussed.
counsel replied that only votes should have been counted on April 3rd.
CJP noticed that counsel campaigned as if there was no land available vice speaker to strike down petition for no confidence.
Mr. Naek expressed regret that earlier religion and accusations of betrayal was used against political opponents now a new the concept of painting opponents with accusations of collusion with foreign states. there were no such trends. good for democratic traditions in country, he added.
Published in Dawn, April 5, 2022
.
