As soon because the Supreme Court rejected the motion to form of a full Punjab hearing court CM election case at the request of the ruling alliance, the bar councils and CM Hamza Shahbaz, head of the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman together with leadership of the allies spoke at a press conference to state that they boycott litigation, if the court refuses to form of a full court.
The President of the PDM, addressing media said that current sentence of the court is considered biased and unfair, adding that only full the court may ensure fair verdict.
He’s next added that “if the SC refuses to form full bench on Punjab CM matter of elections, we also reject this verdict of SC’
Adding to this, the federal minister for Planning and Development Ahsan Iqbal stated that Imran Khan’s prerogative has always been respected. Similarly, the prerogative of Chaudhry Shujaat should also be respected.
Meanwhile, Foreign Minister and PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari stated that “we will boycott the hearings until our demands are accepted.”
Before the end of the press conference, Maulana Fazl stated that the PDM decided that we won’t present ourselves in front of current bench if only full court is formed.
Meanwhile, Interior Minister Rana Sanaulla threatened boycott litigation if the Supreme Court (SC) denies the motion to create full bench for adjudication of a case related to a decision of Deputy Speaker of the Punjab Assembly.
During a conversation with media outside SC building prior to the hearing, Rana Sanaulla said that they boycott litigation, if full bench is not formed. “Hamza Shahbaz will not party in case, and it’s not a threat.”
He said that the court ruled party supreme powers of the leader for give instructions to political party. Sanaullah said that the formation of full bench put an end to the dispute. Interior minister said the high court would likely hear review petition of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Today or Tomorrow.
He said that all political parties of Pakistan is present in Alliance [Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM)] and they ask for formation of a full bench. Sanaulla added what they wanted to club all petitions except hearing petitions of 25 dissident deputies.
“25 deputies were overthrown on instructions of a party main. We are asking now for a full court bench which will enhance the dignity of court.”
Former Vice President of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Maryam Nawaz on Monday said the impact of Supreme Court judgments stand for decades and growing over time.
She claimed that the petitions were filed with court and were not fixed or were facing delay but SC was open at night so PTI could petition against Resolution of the Vice Speaker of the PA.
Our justice system is that when applying people already know what kind bench will be drawn up and decision it will be given, she said.
Maryam gave some examples of legal problems PML-N, claiming that Russia’s party leaders were discriminated against against.
She said that since Hamza was elected main minister of Punjab, he was not allowed work. “He comes from parliament to court and back and forward. which justice this is?”
Vice President PML-N pointed out out that many respected judges were appointed to the high court, and asked why they did not participate in PML-N hearing.
One or two judges who there have always been anti-PML-N and anti-government, they are repeatedly included in in bench,” she said.
During a press conference, Maryam stated that the court decisions supported the PTI, although they ridiculed the judiciary system.
Meanwhile, during media conversation, head of Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) Maulana
Fazlur Rehman supported Maryam view stating that the finger was pointed at the judiciary.
He said that government wanted strengthen the judiciary, where decisions spoke for themselves. “They shouldn’t have conflicts or give impression of bias”.
He said that government received a mandate from people were not allowed to function.
“You sit behind a wall. You can decide that you want […] and make politicians guilty in in eyes of in public and defame them. But if you have the moral courage, take responsibility.”
Maulana said that government didn’t expect any justice from current bench and confirmed by the governments demand for a full court bench.
He left on say that government Maryam supported what was said earlier, stating that this is their “single position”.
Meanwhile, Bilawal Bhutto reiterated that coalition government has only one demand: shaping of a full bench hear a case related to Punjab CMelections.
Coalition government spoke at a press conference in federal capital ahead of higher court hearing on Petition by Chaudhry Parvez Elahi challenging the decision of the Deputy Speaker of the Punjab Assembly.
Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto said there could not be three people decide fate of this country. Three people can not decide on will this country run on democratic, elected or selective system,” he said.
He repeated: “It can’t be possible that three people amend Pakistan’s 1973 constitution with just stroke of a pen”.
It is appropriate to note that earlier the leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Hamza Shahbaz Sharif filed a petition. in Supreme Court to form full court bench on in plea filed by Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q) leader Chaudhry Pervez Elahi in in which he challenged the decision of the Deputy Speaker of the Punjab Assembly on Chief Minister Elections on 22 July.
Appeals of deviant members against election Committee also asked to be heard with judicial case.
The petition asks that the decision of Vice Speaker Sardar Dost Mohammad Mazari is right. Electoral Commission Recognizes Letter from Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan of instructions against desertion of members is valid.
While it’s also referred to the fact that the letter PML-Q head Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain also in accordance with the law and the constitution.
Meanwhile, Aviation Minister Khawaja Saad Rafiq also urged people stating that the only solution to avert a political crisis, which the mediators of imran khan sitting in institutions must stop interfering and allow political forces to decide political decisions.
Saad Rafiq, who is speaking here, claimed that the facilitators of the Imran Khan Project wanted to attack parliamentary democracy of Pakistan followed by blue-eyed appointments in Pakistan Armed Forces and the judiciary and finally mediators of Imran wanted change spirit of Constitution of 1973.
He said if coalition parties won’t bring no-confidence move against Imran then Imran with in help of facilitators will receive a two-thirds majority.
He called for politicians to decide political decisions and if Imran Khan wants to remove our government but only constitutionally no-confidence traffic.
He said he wouldn’t be otherwise decisions on same issue. “This Imran Khan is smashing the army and the EKP and moves yourself in relation to Article 6”.
“If you are want to fix in economy then Imran Khan should come up with democratically,” he continued. added.
When asked, he replied: “Nothing will happen to Punjab.”
minister said that Imran Khan defiled green belts of Islamabad during his long march. It has anyone asked him or called him to an answer?
PMLN Vice President already stated that Imran Khan was ladla (blue-eyed), but her party will not agree to a unilateral decisions of judicial branch.
Federal Minister for Climate Change Senator Sherry Rehman also said that coalition sides in them plea asked the higher court to increase bench to avoid discrimination in litigation of Petition from Pakistan Muslim League (PML-Q) leader Chaudhary Parvez Elahi challenging the deputy speaker’s decision.
Addressing media outside Supreme Court, minister said there are conflicting standards of authorities on in issue of letter of PML-Q President Chaudhary Shujat Hussain is represented at the Punjab Assembly.
“There is no doubt that party the leader is the parliamentary leader of any political party in floor of in house. He one who appoints his partyparliamentary leader in Assembly,” Sherry Rehman said.
She said it clear that leadership of in coalition government hoped the high court was bigger bench would be allowed to hear the case for ensuring justice.
minister said that Article 63-A was discussed, but nothing on in issue that the political party preference will be given to the leader’s instructions over decree of parliamentary leader who was nominated by a political leader of what party.
“Previous decisions were given on this precedent, what if there was a dispute between the party, the then leadership how can it form government in in parliament,” she said.
She claimed that the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) petitioned through Farouk H. Naik, however, neither Naik nor counsel for Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) was allowed to argue in Supreme Court.
“The court is asked to hear all political parties because Farooq Naik was not heard despite his request,” she said.
minister said Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) was creating chaos in country, as was the uncertainty of everything over“The economic crisis will subside as soon as the political turmoil subsides. over”.
In response to a question, she said that the leader of the parliament followed the instructions on legislation is guided party president and also direct voting in elections of in house.
Meanwhile, the federal minister for Law and Justice Azam Nazir Tarar on Monday said only head of political party had the right to announce party policy in conformity with previous decisions of Supreme Court.
Conversation with journalists outside Supreme Court Together with Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah Khan and PML-N leader Attaullah Tarar said any ambiguity on the matter would removed with Constitution of a full bench of Supreme Court.
Azam Nazir Tarar said Pakistan Muslim League (PML-Q) head wanted to support candidate PML-N in Punjab province as it was already in alliance with Decree party in federal government and two of his MJs were part of of federal office.
He also said that a higher court ruled in 2015 what’s the party head had the right to take decisions regarding the party’s policy, adding that full court bench could now examine the situation and interpret Section 63A.
minister said it was stated that the party chief was strong voice of in concerned political party who decides party tickets, voting in in house and even he could stop party membership of anyone.
He said they would make a decision of in full court bench into business.
