Supreme Court off Pakistan On the decision of the larger bench of the Sunni Ittehad Council, two members have said in their dissenting note that ‘PTI Article 51, Article 63 and Article 106 of the Constitution will have to be suspended to give relief.
On the other hand, the ruling party Muslim League And its allied parties are preparing to bring the amendment law in the Election Act after the Supreme Court’s decision.
National Assembly After the approval of the Election Act amendment bill, the Senate meeting will be held on Monday, the bill will be sent to the President of Pakistan for his signature and thus the Election Act amendment bill will become a law.
The general opinion is that the Election Act Amendment Bill introduced in the National Assembly has been brought to stop or delay the implementation of the Supreme Court’s decision on specific seats.
Independent Urdu has discussed all these legal points and possible legal crisis with various legal experts.
What will be the significance of the Supreme Court’s decision after the amendments?
The Supreme Court in its majority judgment has asked PTI to give specific seats and submit new lists to the Election Commission, while Parliament is amending the Election Act, after which new lists cannot be submitted.
Once the Act is enacted, the implementation of the Supreme Court’s decision may be difficult. Because both are contradictory to each other.
Speaking to Independent Urdu, former judge Shah Khawar said that the matter has become more complicated now. According to Article 189, the decision of the Supreme Court is binding on judicial institutions and other government institutions, but Parliament is not mentioned in it.
“Now that the Parliament is making this law, it will be complicated for the Election Commission to follow the decision of the Supreme Court on the issue of specific seats or take a decision according to the new amendment law.”
“The matter will probably go back to the Supreme Court so that the Full Court can also decide on the revision petition on the matter and if the new act is also challenged, the Supreme Court can interpret it.”
He said that ‘this issue will need legal discussion again to get out of the conflicting situation.’
Barrister Haris Azmat said in a conversation with Independent Urdu that ‘now the constitution will prevail. The constitution gives three days time for implementation whereas the Supreme Court in its decision gave 15 days.
“But when the Supreme Court gives a decision, whether it is right or wrong, it has to be implemented.”
If Parliament makes a law, then what will happen? In response to this question, Barrister Haris Azmat said that ‘when the law is made, it will be superior to the decision of the Supreme Court. If the law changes, the decision will not be effective.
Therefore, in the light of this decision, the government can make a law, and the Election Commission will say that they were implementing the decision, while a new law has come.
‘Because the Supreme Court itself has said that if there is any obstacle in the implementation of the decision, it should be referred to the Supreme Court again for which a larger bench will look into the matter.’
He said, “Therefore, it is not easy to implement the decision of the Supreme Court.”
What amendments has the government made in the Election Act?
After the approval of the parliamentary committee, the amendment bill in the Election Act will be presented for approval in the Upper House Senate meeting on Monday.
The Election Act Amendment Bill was presented on July 30 by Muslim League-N Member of National Assembly Bilal Azhar Kayani and Zeib Jafar in which amendments were proposed in Section 66 and 104 of the Election Act.
Section 66 of the Election Act is proposed to be amended to provide that ‘before allotment of election symbol, a candidate shall be treated as an independent candidate if he does not submit an affidavit before the Returning Officer regarding his affiliation with any political party.
According to the proposed amendment, “If an independent candidate submits an affidavit of political affiliation at a later stage that he participated in the election as a candidate of a political party, he will still be considered an independent candidate.”
Whereas this amendment is proposed in Section 104 of the Election Act that ‘If a political party fails to submit its list for certain seats within the prescribed period, it shall be eligible for the quota of certain seats after the expiry of such period. It won’t happen.’
What was the decision of the majority bench regarding reserved seats?
The Supreme Court of Pakistan on July 12 annulled the decision of the Peshawar High Court and the Election Commission regarding reserved seats and said in the decision that Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf is entitled to reserved seats.
The Supreme Court further said in the brief judgment that ‘the elimination of the election symbol does not end the right of a political party to participate in the election. PTI should submit the list regarding specific seats within 15 days.
Of the 13 judges of the Supreme Court, eight supported the decision while five dissented.
Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa during the live televised proceedings of his first trial on September 18, 2023 (PTV screen grab).
What was said in the detailed dissenting note of the judges?
Two judges of the Supreme Court issued a minority judgment and said that ‘it is a proven fact that the Sunni Ittehad Council did not participate in the general elections as a political party, even the chairman of the Sunni Ittehad Council contested as an independent.
“While PTI was not a party in the present case, it would have to go beyond the jurisdiction conferred in Articles 175 and 185, suspending Article 51, Article 63 and Article 106 of the Constitution to give relief to PTI.” Have to do.’
The two judges further wrote in their dissenting notes that ‘no objection was raised in any court proceedings that the members did not join the Sunni Ittehad Council.
Tehreek-e-Insaf was not a party in the Election Commission or the High Court, while the PTI was not a party even until the decision was issued in the Supreme Court.
Adviser to the Prime Minister on Law and Justice, Barrister Aqeel, while reacting to this detailed minority decision, stated that the dissenting note of the Supreme Court Bench judges has sealed the coalition government’s position.
“Courts have always given justice to the first party or the second party, giving relief to the third party is not included in the law, the decisions are sustainable only if they are in accordance with the law.”
Law Minister Atta Tarar also briefed on it and said that ‘decisions have been written outside the constitution in certain seats and that relief has been given, the petitioners did not ask for it.’
During a news conference in Lahore on Sunday, he said that two honorable judges of the Supreme Court raised important points in the dissenting note regarding specific seats, relief was given to the party which is not the petitioner on the issue of specific seats. was.’
While in the dissenting note of Chief Justice Qazi Faiz Isa and Justice Jamal Mandukhel, it was said that ‘PTI or any of its leaders have not challenged the Election Commission’s decision to declare him as an independent member.
However, in view of the fact that the petitions are a continuation of the election process, the court can look into the matter of declaring the PTI candidates independent by the commission.
“Candidates who have not submitted any other declaration till the date of withdrawal of nomination papers are part of the PTI parliamentary party, the Election Commission should include PTI with other political parties and distribute the reserved seats.”
It added that ‘candidates who had the last date for submission of nomination papers till December 24, 2023 and have not declared themselves independent or affiliated with any other party will be considered independent.’
Appeal against the decision of Muslim League-N
The Muslim League-N has requested to issue an injunction on the Supreme Court’s decision of July 12 in the revision petition against the Supreme Court’s decision to give specific seats to Tehreek-e-Insaaf.
This section contains related reference points (Related Nodes field).
It has been said in the petition that ‘in the decision regarding specific seats, the Supreme Court has recognized PTI as a political party, while there was no such plea in the petition of the Sunni Ittehad Council.
“The petition before the Election Commission of Pakistan, the Peshawar High Court and later the Supreme Court of Pakistan raised only the question whether the Sunni Ittehad Council was entitled to certain seats or not.”
‘Sunni Ittihad Council and PTI are two separate political parties, while the Supreme Court’s order seems to have treated both parties as one, the Supreme Court heard many points but in a short judgment There is silence on many important points.’
It is requested in the application that the said application be fixed for hearing as soon as possible.
Matter of reserved seats
There are currently 13 parties in the National Assembly. Out of which eight parties are included in the ruling coalition. The total seats of the ruling coalition parties are 208, which is less than the two-thirds majority of 224.
A two-thirds majority is required for constitutional amendments. After the decision of the Election Commission, the reserved seats were distributed among all the other parties, then the ruling coalition got a two-thirds majority, but after the suspension of the decision of the Supreme Court, the number has again increased to 208.
Due to which the government will remain in place but the government has now lost the two-thirds majority which is important in passing any bill.
The total number of reserved seats in the National and Provincial Assemblies of the Sunni Alliance is 78. Out of which 23 belong to the National Assembly while the rest belong to the Provincial Assemblies. 26 are from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly, 27 from Punjab Assembly and two from Sindh Assembly.
#Reserved #seats #court #order #amendment #act
2024-08-04 14:59:57
