Speaker National Assembly Ayaz Sadiq has issued a clarification on his interview given yesterday, he says that my words were misrepresented.
During the session of the National Assembly on Monday, Speaker Ayaz Sadiq said that my remarks in an interview were misquoted by a newspaper.
In an interview given to private TV yesterday, Ayaz Sadiq termed the Supreme Court‘s majority decision on reserved seats as ‘rewriting the constitution’.
He pointed to the Election Act 2017 Amendment Act and said that the Supreme Court will not recognize the decision of the court as the law has now changed.
He said that if we start listening to the courts, there are many such decisions, so we will not do it on the court’s order, but we will wait for the notification of the Election Commission, because the Election Commission is the competent authority in this regard.
He was asked by the host, ‘Do they consider the Election Commission above the Supreme Court?’
On which Ayaz Sadiq said that despite being aware of the court decisions, he would prefer to wait for the instructions of the Election Commission regarding the members of the Assembly.
After this statement, Sardar Ayaz Sadiq gave an explanation during the national assembly meeting and said that the court writes to the Election Commission of Pakistan, which we follow, we have great respect for the honorable judiciary.
Speaker Ayaz Sadiq said that the newspaper which reported it should do responsible reporting, I considered it a responsible newspaper, it has been written that I said that I will not obey the court orders, it has been completely wrongly reported.
#Speaker #National #Assemblys #explanation #misreporting #statement #newspaper #Pakistan
**Interview with Speaker Ayaz Sadiq: Clarifying Misreported Statements**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us, Speaker Sadiq. Recently, you addressed comments made during an interview that you felt were misrepresented by a newspaper. Could you clarify what was misstated?
**Ayaz Sadiq:** Thank you for having me. In my original remarks, I highlighted that the Supreme Court’s decision regarding reserved seats might be viewed as a ‘rewriting of the constitution’. However, the essence of what I said was twisted. I emphasize our respect for the judiciary and our intention to await the Election Commission’s notification before taking any actions.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned a preference for following the Election Commission over the Supreme Court. Do you believe this statement may lead to public confusion regarding the authority of these institutions?
**Ayaz Sadiq:** I understand how it could be interpreted that way, and it was not my intention to undermine the court. My point was that the procedural authority lies with the Election Commission when it comes to implementing electoral rules.
**Interviewer:** In a political landscape where judicial decisions can significantly impact legislative processes, how do you think this incident affects public trust in the judiciary and the electoral institutions?
**Ayaz Sadiq:** Trust is crucial. We need to ensure that communication is clear and that the public understands that all institutions have their role. The media plays a big part in shaping this perception, so responsible reporting is essential.
**Interviewer:** Some might argue this situation raises a bigger question about accountability in reporting. How can we ensure that journalists convey the nuances of political statements accurately to prevent misinformation?
**Ayaz Sadiq:** It’s vital for the media to engage in responsible journalism and fact-checking. I encourage dialogue between political figures and the press to foster a better understanding and prevent miscommunications.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Speaker Sadiq. Lastly, how can the public play a role in demanding accurate reporting from the media?
**Ayaz Sadiq:** The public can hold media outlets accountable by questioning narratives and seeking clarification on controversial statements. An informed citizenry is key to a vibrant democracy.
**Interviewer:** Considering these perspectives, do you think it’s prudent to question the integrity and authority of our judicial system when such misinterpretations occur? How does this shape our understanding of the balance of power between different branches of government?
