— Counsel for PPP says the dismissal of the vote was ‘illegal’ but not unconstitutional
ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court sought the record of proceedings of the National Assembly conducted on the motion of no-confidence in Imran Khan moved by the unified opposition.
The directive came on Tuesday as the court resumed its deliberations on the legality of the prime minister’s attempt to block the opposition bid to oust him, a dispute that has led to political turmoil in the country.
Khan lost his parliamentary majority last week and had been facing a no-confidence vote tabled by a united opposition that he was expected to lose on Sunday.
But the deputy speaker of parliament, a member of Khan’s party, threw out the no-confidence motion, ruling it was part of a foreign conspiracy and unconstitutional. Khan then dissolved parliament.
The opposition has challenged Khan’s decision in a legal case in the Supreme Court that began on Monday, with a five-member bench of judges hearing arguments in a packed courtroom.
The panel of five judges has not said when it might give a ruling.
At the outset of the hearing, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leader Raza Rabbani noted the ruling by the deputy speaker was “illegal” but not unconstitutional. “The no-confidence motion cannot be dismissed without voting on it,” he said, citing Article 95 of the Constitution.
He also said the court had to examine the extent of the “immunity” of parliamentary proceedings. “Whatever has happened can only be termed as civilian martial law.”
Rabbani was of the view that a deliberate attempt was made to construct a narrative against the no-trust vote while a foreign conspiracy was also touted.
He said the National Assembly session held on March 21 was adjourned after offering prayers for a deceased lawmaker, claiming this had not happened in the past.
Rabbani also said the no-trust motion cannot be rejected per the Constitution. “It can be dismissed only when if those who submitted it take it back and the speaker can reject it only after voting is held on it.”
He went on to say that President Arif Alvi didn’t need to file the reference seeking interpretation on Article 63-A. Instead, he should have advised the prime minister to go for voting on the motion filed against him.
He requested the court to seek the minutes of the National Security Committee meeting and the secret diplomatic cable.
He also requested to form a judicial commission to probe into proceedings and asked for a stay on Sunday’s assembly session.
Meanwhile, the counsel for Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) also said the deputy speaker did not give the opposition a chance to speak during the session on April 3 and gave the floor to Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) leader Fawad Chaudhry.
At that, Justice Akhtar said the process of the no-confidence motion was underlined in the rules of procedure, not the Constitution. However, the barrister, Makhdoom Ali Khan, argued that rules were formed on the basis of the Constitution.
Continuing his argument, Khan said that the no-confidence motion can’t be dismissed by the speaker once it is tabled in the House.
“Our concern is about the legality of the ruling of the speaker,” Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial said. “We don’t want to indulge in policy matters.”
Khan said the prime minister’s actions were a violation of the constitution. “This is not just a matter of procedure but it is in the negation of parliamentary democracy,” he told the court.
The hearing was adjourned on Tuesday after legal arguments against the move were concluded. The court will hear from the government’s team on Wednesday.
The court will reconvene at around noon on Wednesday. It has not said when it might reach a ruling.
THE CASE
The court could order that parliament be reconstituted, call for a new election or bar Khan from standing again if he is found to have acted unconstitutionally.
The court could also decide that it cannot intervene in parliamentary affairs.
The most significant decision before the Supreme Court is whether Qasim Khan Suri, the deputy speaker, had the constitutional authority to throw out the no-confidence vote, according to constitutional lawyer Ali Zafar.
Zafar told The Associated Press that the court also has to decide whether it even has the authority to rule on this matter. Khan’s party insists actions of a parliament speaker are privileged and cannot be challenged in court.
If the court rules the deputy speaker was out of line, the parliament will reconvene and hold the no-confidence vote on Khan, legal experts say. If the court upholds the latest actions, Pakistan is heading into early elections.
Drawn-out legal proceedings would create a power vacuum with political and economic implications, including for talks with the International Monetary Fund for funds to support the cash-strapped economy.
— With input from AP
Expediency would demand/dictate that the rather improper step taken by the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly be permitted to stand despite being in clear violation of the Constitution, apart from making look like fools the Parliamentarians as well as the 220 million Pakistanis. Another argument in support of condoning such an illegal act would be that it would lead to fresh elections which would provide an opportunity to the masses to determine the outcome they want by exercising their right of vote. However, it is not as simple as it would appear or made to appear for the following reasons:
1) Can the mischief and violation of Constitution done by a small group of people be allowed to take precedence over the rights, interests and choice of 220 million Pakistanis?
2) Is the country’s top court prepared to take the blame for giving rise to a start of various adventures by over-ambitious and bent politicians by condoning this violation which act would amount to indirectly encouraging them by giving them a precedent to quote.
3) Through a detailed report, and quoting various legal hitches and procedural challengers, the Election Commission of Pakistan has expressed its inability to hold General elections in three months (Dawn report: General elections not possible in three months, says ECP, of April 5 Link: https://www.dawn.com/news/1683531).
4) With country’s economy in a terrible shape with fast-depleting foreign exchange reserves, and rising current account deficits, can the country afford a long period of political instability, with delayed elections and further delays in the formation of governments?
5) I think the right and proper approach would be to reverse the Deputy speaker’s ruling and to allow the party/group which demonstrates majority in the assemblies to form the government. And obviously, the opposition will succeed. This group also has persons of ability and experience to form and run the government for the remainder of the five year term. This will also allow holding of the fresh population census – which was promised by PTI – to ensure that Karachi population is correctly counted.
The snag here is that the major parties included in the opposition groups are accused of corruption, and not entirely without reason. But unfortunately, our available choice presently is, and has most been, not between angels and devils, but between lesser evil or bigger evil and this will remain so until the time the nation shows its will to cast its vote purely on the basis of merit, without being swayed by other considerations.
Karachi.