During the hearing of the suo motu notice taken by the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly against the rejection of the no-confidence mo...
During the hearing of the suo motu notice taken by the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly against the rejection of the no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Umar Ata Bandial remarked that "all political parties are respected." Can't make a decision in the air.
 |
| New 5-member larger bench of the Supreme Court will hear the notice today at 1 o'clock. File Photo: SC Website |
A five-member larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial heard the suo motu notice on the issue of rolling the deputy speaker on the no-confidence motion.
Other judges of the bench include Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Mian Khel and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel.
Read more: Speaker detailed rolling, opposition accused of colluding with foreign powers
When the hearing started, PTI lawyer Babar Awan reached the rostrum and said that he wanted to say two things in the court.
He said that he would like to draw attention to the March 21 order of the court. On March 21, at the request of the Supreme Court Bar, a two-member bench had issued the order.
Not political statements, only the Speaker's rolling will be reviewed, Chief Justice
Chief Justice Omar Ata Bandial said, "We want to hear the petitioners first and if you want to make a statement, give it."
Babar Awan said that he wanted to refer to the decision of the Supreme Court dated March 21, 2022. The Attorney General had assured the Supreme Court that no member of the Assembly would be barred from coming.
Read also: Imran Khan will continue to serve as Prime Minister till the appointment of caretaker Prime Minister: President
The Chief Justice said that today we will give an appropriate decision and will review not the political statements but only the rolling of the Speaker.
Babar Awan said that we are ready to present a writ including rolling and Chairman Imran Khan message is that we are ready to go to the polls.
Talking to PTI lawyer, the Chief Justice said, "You are talking about politics. We will see what is the legal status of Speaker Rolling."
The Chief Justice said that today we will issue an appropriate order and review the proceedings of the National Assembly.
During the hearing, the lawyer of PML-N, Pakistan Peoples Party and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) Farooq H Naik gave arguments.
Farooq H Naik said that he did not want to be a burden on the court so the rest of the lawyers would help him.
On this occasion, Farooq H Naik requested for formation of a full court bench which was rejected by the court.
Request for full court bench rejected
Farooq H Naik said that all political parties including PPP are requested to form a full court bench and a bench comprising all judges.
Read more: No-confidence motion against PM unconstitutional, resolution rejected
The Chief Justice said that you should inform the bench about the constitutional and legal issues, we will then review whether a full court should be formed or not.
Justice Umar Ata Bandial said, "If you have any objection to the five judges, tell us. We will go." To which Farooq H Naik replied that we have confidence in the court.
The Chief Justice said that if you have no confidence in anyone in the bench, you should be told that distrust in any judge will raise the bench.
Opposition parties have stated they will not run in the by-elections, but will not run in the by-elections.
The Chief Justice said that the formation of a full court bench would disrupt the hearing of other cases.
Farooq H Naik said that it was not necessary to make an allegation for filing a no-confidence motion, the order should be presented after the no-confidence motion was filed.
Read also: Prime Minister, all orders of the President will be subject to the final decision of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that the issue of presenting the order on March 10 was irrelevant.
He said that orders of the day are issued when the assembly is in session, does the speaker have to convene the assembly? Wasn't March 10 to issue Orders of the Day? Was March 10 the day to circulate orders?
The Chief Justice said that the constitutional status of what happened in the National Assembly has to be reviewed.
Farooq H Naik said that no-confidence motion was filed on March 8 and recusal was called for convening assembly session. The speaker was bound to convene the session in 14 days.
Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that his case was not about convening a meeting on time.
On this occasion, Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that the Speaker had also issued reasons for the delay in convening the meeting.
Opposition parties have stated they will not run in the by-elections, but are expected to hold a meeting on March 28 to discuss the issue.
He said that the no-confidence motion was passed on March 28 for voting.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar inquired whether the Speaker could have said at that time that he would not accept the motion for voting. If 50 refuse, what will happen?
At this stage, the Chief Justice said that come to the facts of the case, the no-confidence motion was not discussed before the vote, the law mentions a clear discussion before the vote.
Farooq H Naik said that the Speaker allowed a motion to be moved in the House but no debate on no-confidence was allowed.
Procedure was violated in the no-confidence motion, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said
Justice Muneeb Akhtar inquired what would happen if the Speaker did not allow the motion of no-confidence, then Farooq H Naik said that the Speaker had adjourned the sitting till April 3 on the matter by allowing the resolution.
Asked why he did not discuss the no-confidence motion before taking direct action, the opposition lawyer replied that there was no vote on the no-confidence motion, to which the chief justice said he knew.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that the procedure was violated in the proceedings on the no-confidence motion.
Farooq H Naik said that when the proceedings started, former law minister Fawad Chaudhry spoke briefly, it is also clear in the speaker's rolling that the resolution was not discussed, Shahbaz Sharif tried to speak on the day of the meeting but did not speak. Ski
Chief Justice Omar Ata Bandial said that the no-confidence motion was not debated on March 31, meaning that April 4 would be the last day for discussion and voting.
Justice Mandokhel asked whether Article 95 referred to the debate or direct voting, to which Farooq H Naik said that the debate on the no-confidence motion was mentioned in the Rules.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that the law minister had asked for rolling, the principle is that when rolling is asked, it must be discussed first.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel asked whether Article 95 mentions debate or direct voting.
Farooq H Naik said that the discussion on the no-confidence motion was mentioned in the rules.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that the law minister had asked for rolling, the principle is that when rolling is asked, it must be discussed first.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar inquired whether the Deputy Speaker could give rolling or the Speaker could give rolling.
Farooq H Naik said that in the law, the speaker means the speaker while the chairperson can also give a roll call.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that under Rule 28, only the Speaker can give rolling, can the Speaker take back his rolling.
The Chief Justice inquired whether the day of April 3 was fixed for voting instead of giving a chance to debate on the motion. How can the day be given?
Farooq H Naik said that the Speaker did not allow discussion.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar asked under which role has the Deputy Speaker given the rolling? On which Farooq H Naik said that when the meeting started, Fawad Chaudhry asked about the letter under Article 5, on the point of order of Fawad Chaudhry, the Deputy Speaker issued a rolling motion.
He said that the point of order of Fawad Chaudhry could have been discussed, the speaker knew that it was an illegal step so he was not present.
I don't think the Speaker has the authority to give such a roll call, Justice Muneeb Akhtar
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that under Rule 28, the Speaker has the power to give rolling. The Speaker can give rolling in the House or in his office on file. Can the Speaker withdraw his rolling?
On this, the opposition lawyer said that the assembly rules are silent regarding the withdrawal of Rolling.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that my opinion is that the power to give rolling belongs only to the Speaker and not to anyone else. There was no authority to give.
Farooq H Naik said that the Deputy Speaker was only presiding over the meeting, a formal notification has to be issued for the acting speaker, the letter mentioned was not presented in the assembly.
He said that the Deputy Speaker had declared the members of the opposition as traitors through his rolling motion. 198 members of the opposition were accused of foreign conspiracy, 175 members of the opposition while the rest were deviant members of PTI.
Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that why are they wasting time on who was from which party? Can a no-confidence motion be convened by calling a meeting for voting? Is.
Lawyer Farooq H Naik, while presenting the speaker's rolling motion in the court, said that the no-confidence motion was rejected in less than three minutes.
The Chief Justice said that this is an emotional conversation, talk about the legal point, explain how the rolling of the Deputy Speaker is unconstitutional.
Farooq H Naik said that the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker do not have the power to dismiss the no-confidence motion. Is.
Farooq H Naik further said that the position of the opposition was not heard before the rolling, all the opposition members were accused of treason, democracy has not yet been able to get out of the cards of patriotism and religion.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar asked what is the opinion of those who deviate from the party. To which Farooq H Naik replied that he would also give his position regarding deviant members.
Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that the parliamentary committee was also mentioned in the rolling of the Deputy Speaker. The opposition deliberately did not participate in the committee. The whole matter was placed in the parliamentary committee on national security. Has to give
The Chief Justice asked to tell us to what extent the Speaker has constitutional protection to which Farooq H Naik replied that it is written in the Constitution that the procedure of Assembly proceedings of the Speaker cannot be objected to.
Farooq H Naik said that the allegation of international conspiracy was not heard before, if the conspiracy continues then there will be problems in the future, we have not been able to go beyond treason, patriotism and religious issues, it There are threats to our democratic values.
The Chief Justice said that the case is adjourned till tomorrow on which Farooq H Naik said that the case should be completed today.
However, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that it is not possible to give a verdict after hearing the arguments today, the opinion of all political parties is respected and the far-reaching results of the Supreme Court decision will be found.
Farooq H Naik said that he has written a letter today asking for three names for the caretaker Prime Minister.
The Chief Justice said that Naik says caretaker government is about to be formed but we cannot give decisions in the air.
The court adjourned the hearing till 12 noon tomorrow.
What happened at the first hearing?
It may be recalled that the no-confidence motion against the Prime Minister was moved by Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri in the National Assembly yesterday. Was
A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Omar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, while hearing the suo motu notice, remarked that all orders of the Prime Minister and the President would be subject to final decision of the Supreme Court.
Read more: Prime Minister, all orders of the President will be subject to the final decision of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court
The court had issued notice to the Secretary of Defense to inform him about the law and order situation in the country, while rejecting the petition of the Deputy Speaker to suspend the rolling motion, it had also issued notice to the Attorney General.
The Chief Justice said that it was Ramzan Sharif and did not want to suspend the hearing.
The Chief Justice said that no government body would act unconstitutionally, not all political parties and government bodies would benefit from this situation.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice said that if the President is made a party in the self-notice, a hearing will be held tomorrow after a brief hearing of the 63-A presidential reference as this is a very important matter.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar had inquired as to why the Punjab Assembly session was adjourned, on which PML-N senator and lawyer leader Azam Nazir Tarar had said that the Punjab Assembly session was in a state of law and order. Postponed
Read also: Opposition demands role of Supreme Court
The Chief Justice had remarked that he could not interfere in the proceedings of the National Assembly beyond his jurisdiction.
Later, the Supreme Court had decided to form a new five-member larger bench to hear notices on the political situation.
The Supreme Court hearing on the reference to the interpretation of Article 63A was also adjourned.
In a written order of the hearing, the apex court had said that the office had sent a note of media reports on the issue of no-confidence and according to reports, the deputy speaker had rejected the no-confidence motion in the light of Article 5 of the constitution.
The Supreme Court said that a notice was issued on the note from the Chamber of the Chief Justice of Pakistan. The most important thing for the Supreme Court is to establish law and order in the country.
The written order said that it has to be ascertained whether the rolling of the Deputy Speaker is protected under Article 69 or not, however, any order issued by the President and the Prime Minister will be subject to the Supreme Court.
No comments
Thanks