The Supreme Court rejected the pleas to constitute a full court to hear against the Deputy Speaker's ruling on the election of the Punja...
The Supreme Court rejected the pleas to constitute a full court to hear against the Deputy Speaker's ruling on the election of the Punjab Chief Minister.
A 3-member bench headed by Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial, comprising Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Muneeb Akhtar, conducted the hearing.
After hearing the arguments of the parties, the Supreme Court adjourned and after the adjournment delivered a short judgment stating that all the petitions for constitution of a full bench are rejected and a three-member bench will hear tomorrow at 11:30 am.
After the arguments regarding the formation of the full court by the Supreme Court, it took a break for the decision and after the break the hearing started, the Supreme Court made the Pakistan Muslim League (Q) and the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) a party. Request accepted.
The court said that it will hear the case on merit, the Chief Justice said that whether to constitute a full court bench or not, further hearing is required.
On this occasion, the Federal Law Minister said that arguments have not been made on the revision case yet, it is a province of 12 crores and it is a serious matter.
The Chief Justice said that 5 judges had sent the Prime Minister home, on which the Law Minister said that he wanted to apologize, but the Chief Justice said that you should not apologize, you had distributed sweets, we have to look at the Constitution.
Chief Justice Umar Attabandial said that if you want not to appear in the case, if the current government is not recognizing the Supreme Court, it is very serious, Article 63A has a long way to go.
The Law Minister said that I have requested that creating a full court bench will increase judicial respect.
There is an impression that cases go on in the same bench, lawyer Irfan Qadir
Deputy Speaker Dost Mohammad Mazari's lawyer Irfan Qadir argued that Justice Qazi Faiz Isa's case was heard by 10 judges, it was the case of one judge and it is the case of the entire province.
He said that it was Ali Zafar's secret that this bench heard the case, Justice Qazi Faiz Isa was a judge who used the judicial council forum.
Irfan Qadir said that Justice Qazi Faiz Isa's case was heard by 10 judges while here it is a matter of one province.
He clarified and said that I am not saying that there is a question about impartiality, but I am saying that if a full court is made, the respect of the court will increase.
He said that there is an impression that the cases are heard in a single bench. He was a little annoyed at my opinion about the presence of the Deputy Speaker, on which the Chief Justice said that the full court is made in big cases.
The Chief Justice said that we have seen our decision regarding the full court, governance is a big problem in the country.
The Chief Justice said that we took notice of the Deputy Speaker, but we did not take notice in this matter.
The Chief Justice said that there is no need to prolong the case, good governance is a very important matter in our country, we automatically took notice in the case of the federal government.
The Chief Justice said that in our view the Speaker has violated Article 95, to which Irfan Qadir said that the revision case cannot be separated from this case.
Irfan Qadir said that there is no need for the Law Minister to plead in the Supreme Court.
The Deputy Speaker's lawyer argued that if the court says that the votes of the dissenting members will be counted, then the matter will get worse.
The Chief Justice said that there is no need to prolong the case, good governance is a very important matter in our country, we automatically took notice in the case of the federal government, in our view the Speaker has violated Article 95.
Irfan Qadir said that politicians as well as the judiciary should be united in their decisions, I am not criticizing the Supreme Court, we will go but the constitution should prevail.
Irfan Qadir said that there is a big difference between the head of the party and the head of the parliamentary party, the party wants to make Parvez Elahi the chief minister, whom he called robbers.
Continuing his arguments, he said that Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain is a major politician of the country.
He said that those who broke the constitution, took the country to the brink of destruction, now there is an impression that the court is benefiting them.
Chief Justice Umar Attabandial said that we reduced the burden of pending cases on the Supreme Court, all the judges of the Supreme Court are reducing the burden of pending cases with hard work and dedication.
The Chief Justice said that he is hearing the cases by sitting in different registries, social media listens to facts and not only narratives, we gave an opportunity to all the parties in this case to speak, this court works day and night to deal with the pending cases. is working
Chief Justice Umar Attabandial said that in this case there is a directive of the party chief, only one point to be seen is whether the party chief can overrule the decision of the parliamentary party or not.
The Chief Justice said that the Parliamentary Party represents the common people in the Assembly, the 18th Amendment gave powers to the Parliamentary Party, Boris Johnson was removed from the Prime Ministership by the Parliamentary Party.
The Chief Justice said that we have to strengthen democracy and parliament, not individuals.
Along with this, the lawyer of Deputy Speaker Punjab Assembly Dost Mohammad Mazari completed his arguments.
The case of rejection of Senate Chairman's vote is pending in the Supreme Court, lawyer PPP
Pakistan People's Party (PPP) lawyer Farooq H Naik started the arguments and said that it is to be seen whether the issue of Parliament can come to court or not, if Parliament acts unconstitutionally then the matter will come to court.
Farooq H. Naik said that the case of rejecting votes in the Chairman Senate election is also pending in the Supreme Court, Parliament's problems should not come to the courts, the Supreme Court should see that it cannot interfere in the internal proceedings of the Parliament.
The Chief Justice said that when there is violation of the constitution or illegal action in the Parliament, the matter will come to the Supreme Court.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that you are talking about the facts, there is a legal question before the court, there was a case of Article 69 in the past, today you are standing on the other side, so you say that the court has no authority.
Farooq H. Naik told the court that now time and circumstances have changed, adjourn the hearing till Thursday as I want to give more arguments.
Justice Ijazul Hassan said that it is not a matter of two days, the court has to determine whether the choice of the Chief Minister was correct or not, the only question is that if the Deputy Speaker
The party chief wrote a letter to all members, lawyer Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain
Salahuddin, the lawyer of Pakistan Muslim League (Q) President Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain started the arguments and said that the party chief wrote a letter to all the members, I think the party chief gives orders to the parliamentary party.
Barrister Salahuddin said that the court had asked this question when the letter was written and when it was received, on which Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that the court had asked the question only to understand. Given in the light.
Chaudhry Shujaat's lawyer said that the matter should be decided in full court.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar, the third member of the bench of the Supreme Court, said that all the members are important in the parliamentary party, there should not be dictatorship of the party leader in the parliamentary party, decisions are taken in consultation with the parliamentary party.
Barrister Salahuddin said that many parties say that whoever's name is in the papers, our leader is so-and-so, the real decision is made by the party leader, whoever the leader is.
Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain's lawyer said that if he is a senator of any party, he will take instructions from which parliamentary party.
Barrister Salahuddin said that every political party has a manifesto, in third world countries the party leader has his own personality.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that all the members are important in the parliamentary party, there should not be dictatorship of the party leader in the parliamentary party, decisions are taken with the consultation of the parliamentary party.
Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain's lawyer said that he will submit the record of the letters sent to the member of the provincial assembly and the deputy speaker, there are some factual questions that have been raised in the court and it is necessary to answer them.
He said that it is a matter of direction of the parliamentary party, who can give this direction, the decision of the vote belongs to the party leader and the party, the insight of the full court should be taken advantage of.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that why are you repeatedly mentioning the full court, you are referring to the decision of 8 judges, then 9 judges can also hear.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that you are referring to the 21st Amendment case, look at the ratio of the decision in the 21st Amendment, the ratio of the decision keeps changing no matter how many members of the bench there are.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that look at the ratio of the decision in the 21st Amendment, the ratio of the decision keeps changing no matter how many members of the bench there are.
It was not expected that the new opposition will walk out, Chief Justice
The Chief Justice said that it was not expected that the new opposition would walk out after the assembly was restored, the court had decided in good faith.
Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandyal said that the crisis is increasing from April 2022 till today, you probably want this crisis to last longer, the full court will be able to be formed in September, so should you stop all the work till then, for now. Only 2 more judges available.
The Chief Justice said that the most important matters of the state cannot be hung because of your wish, constitutional and public interest cases should not be hung, like every citizen, we are worried about the economic situation.
Chief Justice Umar Attabandial said that whether this state of the economy is because of the court or because of instability, today the one who gets more votes is the outsider and the one who gets less is the chief minister.
The Chief Justice said that Hamza Shehbaz needs a solid basis to remain the Chief Minister, the work of the state should continue, he wants to dispose of the case quickly.
Barrister Salahuddin said that judges can also hear the case on video link, to which the Chief Justice said that even before the election of the Chief Minister, the parties had called and agreed and Hamza Shehbaz was retained as the Chief Minister till the by-election.
The Chief Justice said that Hamza Shehbaz played a role in a peaceful and excellent by-election, now the result of the Chief Minister's election should be respected.
The Chief Justice said that the elections were held on the decision of the court and were held in a peaceful manner, let us find out where it is written that even if the party leader is not elected, his word has to be accepted.
The Chief Justice said that today the person who got 179 votes against 186 is the Chief Minister, such a Chief Minister needs solid legal reasons to continue.
The Chief Justice said that we did not stop the present Chief Minister from working even while giving the decision on July 1, the results of the election should be respected, you are saying that the party leader has control.
The Chief Justice said that you should ask yourself who has given the instructions according to the constitution, to which lawyer Chaudhry Shujaat said that we do not want to prolong the case at all.
Chief Justice Umar Attabandial said that efforts are being made to provide facilities to those who come to the court, Barrister Salahuddin said that judges in America are appointed by political parties and the government.
Chaudhry Shujaat's lawyer said that thankfully there is no such system in Pakistan, the Fazil bench is there even at 7 o'clock in the night, so the rest of the judges will also happily perform their duties.
The sky will surely fall due to the impression of a few judges on important political matters, Barrister Salahuddin
Regarding the full court, the Chief Justice said that the judges are not available, on which the lawyer Chaudhry Shujaat said that the judges who are available can also sit and decide, but the Chief Justice said that apart from the three judges, we have only two more judges. are in the city.
Lawyer Salahuddin said that judges can also participate through video link, Chief Justice said that video link is for the convenience of complainants.
Barrister Salahuddin said that the court has given a clear decision on the power of the Speaker to reject the vote, to which Justice Ejazul Hassan said that if you are to be accepted, are the members of the Assembly dummies.
The Muslim League (Q) leader's lawyer said that if the members are sitting in the meeting and it is said that they have to support so and so, will it be considered a parliamentary party meeting?
The lawyer of Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain said that the people have seen the miracles of the Sharifs of Model Town and the glorious past of the Chaudhry of Gujarat, so whether Hamza becomes the Chief Minister or Parvez Elahi, the sky will not fall.
Barrister Salahuddin said in his arguments that the public had an impression that if a few judges decide on important political issues, the sky will necessarily fall.
He said that there will be a request to make the court a full court on matters related to 63A.
The Supreme Court was once again adjourned for 15 minutes.
Earlier, at the beginning of the hearing, the court called former President Supreme Court Bar Latif Afridi to the rostrum and said that we see that there are many bar presidents present here.
Also Read: Election of Chief Minister Punjab: Chaudhry Shujaat, JUI, People's Party request to be a party in the case
Latif Afridi said that the revision petitions for the interpretation of Article 63A are pending, the current political situation is very complicated, the Supreme Court is a constitutional court, our former presidents have met.
He said that the review petition of the Supreme Court Bar is also pending, all the cases should be heard by forming a full court consisting of available judges.
Justice Ejaz-ul-Ahsan said that let the case be set up.
All stakeholders will be heard, Chief Justice
Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial said that this case is directly related to our decision, we would like the parties to guide us.
However, Parvaiz Elahi's lawyer, Advocate Ali Zafar, objected to the demands of the former presidents of the Supreme Court Bar and said that none of our questions were answered.
Meanwhile, the Chief Justice had a conversation with PPP's lawyer Farooq H. Naik, Justice Umar Atta Bandyal said that you do not have a chair.
Farooq H. Naik said that there is no question of the chair, he does not care about the chair, we had submitted the application in the morning, it should also be heard.
Read more: Hamza Shehbaz to remain Punjab CM as 'trustee' till Monday, Supreme Court
The Chief Justice said that all stakeholders will be heard.
Latif Afridi said that appeals against the decision of the Election Commission are also pending, a full court should be formed to avoid a constitutional crisis.
He said that the crises are getting deeper, the entire system is at stake, the judiciary and parliament are also part of the system.
Deputy Speaker's lawyer Irfan Qadir also requested the court to form a full bench while starting the arguments, then the court inquired on which points the full court should hear.
Irfan Qadir said that regarding Article 63A of the Constitution, you should read paragraph number 1 and 2 of your order, which will clear everything.
To which part of our judgment did the Deputy Speaker refer in Ruling, C.J
Irfan Qadir said that the President sent a reference to the interpretation of Article 63A, Article 63A cannot be read in isolation, instructions are given to the political party by the party leader, political parties have an important role in parliamentary democracy.
He further said that due to the weakness of the political parties, the democratic system may be in danger, deviation from the party policy is like a cancer for the system.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that only those members who are present in the assembly are part of the parliamentary party, there is a difference between a political party and a parliamentary party, can the same person give instructions to the declaration and the parliamentary party?
Lawyer Hamza Shehbaz said that I have submitted my reply to the court. Is?
Justice Ijazul Ahsan remarked that the constitution is clear on direction and declaration, the role of the party leader and the parliamentary party are separate.
Hamza Shehbaz's lawyer gave an irrelevant answer, so the judges directed him to answer the main question first.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar told the lawyer that we have understood the point you are trying to raise, it would be appropriate to give another lawyer a chance.
Justice Ejaz-ul-Hassan said that party guidelines and declarations are two different things.
Hamza Shehbaz's lawyer Mansoor Awan said that the vote against the party policy will be rejected, that is the point.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan inquired whether the party chief can be the head of the parliamentary party. State on which part of the judgment the Deputy Speaker relied.
Hamza Shehbaz's lawyer said that the Deputy Speaker relied on paragraph number three of the judgment.
After the 18th Amendment, the party leader was replaced by the Parliamentary Party, Justice Muneeb Akhtar
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that Article 63A was added in the 14th Amendment, your political party........
In the presidential reference, MPs were saved from the dictatorship of the party chief, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan
The Chief Justice said that the senior parliamentarians in this court had taken the view that the party chief could be a dictator, to reduce his role, the role was also given to the leader of the parliamentary party.
The Chief Justice said that there are hereditary parties in Pakistan, how can a leader sit outside and give instructions.
Justice Ijazul Ahsan said that parliamentary representatives have been given powers in the constitution, the parliamentary party decides who to vote for in the assembly, the presidential reference saved the parliamentarians from the dictatorship of the party leader.
The Chief Justice said that many members complained about the party chief's dictatorship, the party chief must also listen to the opinion of the parliamentary party.
Lawyer Hamza Shehbaz said that the heads of 4 political parties are not part of the parliamentary party, JUI (F) is in the name of the party chief but Maulana Fazlur Rahman is not part of the parliamentary party, the answerable party leader to the people is the parliamentary party. Not a party.
A political party is essentially a parliamentary party, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan
Justice Ijazul Hassan said that the role of the party leader is very important, the party leader alone decides to send a reference against a deviant member, the parliamentary party will give instructions on who to vote for and the reference leader will send it.
He further said that the political party is actually the same as the parliamentary party, the members who are elected by the people and sent to the assembly have the mandate.
He said that in Britain all the powers are with the parliamentary party, in Britain the party leader has no role in the parliament.
He said that the Deputy Speaker, while accepting the court decision as correct, had referred to it in the ruling.
On this, the Deputy Speaker's counsel said that the judgment was referred to the extent of rejecting the vote.
Justice Ejaz-ul-Ahsan said that means the court decision is recognized to the extent of rejecting the vote, the question is only the interpretation of the Deputy Speaker whether it is correct or not.
He said that the Deputy Speaker relied on our decision and went beyond the decision and gave the ruling.
He said that the question is whether the Deputy Speaker interpreted our decision correctly, the question is also whether the Deputy Speaker did not interpret our decision wrongly.
During the hour, Federal Law Minister Nazir Tarar intervened in the proceedings again and said that Mansoor Awan is young and has a lot of burden on his shoulders.
Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial said that Mansoor Awan is giving very good arguments, the court stopped Mansoor Awan from taking instructions from the Law Minister.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar said that Mansoor Awan is the lawyer of Punjab Chief Minister, how can he take instructions from the Law Minister.
The Chief Justice said that don't be bothered by the questions, continue the arguments.
Mansoor Awan said that the Election Commission accepted the instructions of Imran Khan, the Election Commission decided on this matter, on which Justice Ejaz-ul-Ahsan inquired what the Election Commission has to do with this matter.
The Chief Justice said that you have given the decision of the Election Commission, you should also read the decision of the Election Commission.
Azam Nazir Tarar said that all the party members had received Chaudhry Shujaat's letter before the meeting started.
Mansoor Awan said that Imran Khan had given instructions to PTI in the first elections of Chief Minister Punjab, the Election Commission had declared the members deviant on the instructions of Imran Khan, Mansoor Awan had also instructed the MPs of Imran Khan. I submitted.
Justice Ejazul Ahsan said that there is a difference between the earlier and the present case of Punjab Chief Minister election, the members of the Election Commission were of the opinion that they did not receive party instructions, in the present case the members say that the parliamentary party decided to vote for Pervez Elahi. what was
He remarked that none of the parties objected to the point of the parliamentary party directive, the dissenting members and the facts of this case are different, the dissenting members were of the view that we did not get the evidence and instructions, the issue here is different.
He said that all 10 members cast their vote, no member voted for the other side, all the members voted for one side, none of the ten members said that the parliamentary party meeting was not held.
The Chief Justice told Barrister Ali Zafar in a dialogue that do not argue on the merits of the case, argue on the formation of the full court, the other side has argued on the full court, you tell why the full court should not be formed, you are the other side. How to reject a full court request?
Barrister Ali Zafar said that Article 63A is very clear, the party leader has to give a declaration according to the instructions of the parliamentary party, the court has already given an opinion on Article 63A after detailed hearings, the instructions of the parliamentary party must be accepted. It is a democracy.
Lawyer Pervaiz Elahi said that even those who give different opinions in the party meeting are bound by the decision.
Barrister Ali Zafar opined that there is no scope in the Constitution for the dictatorship of the head of a political party, Article 63A and its judicial interpretation is very clear and unambiguous.
Ali Zafar said that the Chief Justice has the authority to form a full court, in 15 cases the Chief Justice has refused to form a full court, the court has to stop all other work from the full court.
The Chief Justice inquired whether the court decision of 2015 is unconstitutional, to which Ali Zafar said that there should be complete trust in the court, it is the discretion of the Chief Justice to form a full court, whether all court work is stopped and the full court is a single case.
Security is tight
Earlier, only relevant leaders of political parties were allowed to attend today's hearing.
An Islamabad police official said that only the leaders of the defendant parties will be allowed to enter the court premises with the permission of the Supreme Court administration.
Also Read: '3 People Can't Decide Country's Fate', Ruling Alliance Demands Full Court on Pervez Elahi's Petition
In a statement from the liaison officer of Islamabad Capital Police, it was said that the lists have been provided by the party leaders for entering the Supreme Court, the leaders of the parties were allowed to enter the court room and the Supreme Court with the permission of the Supreme Court administration. will go
Police said that no jalsa, procession and gathering will be allowed in the red zone including the Supreme Court, special arrangements have been made to maintain the flow of traffic.
The statement further said that for the positive global image of Pakistan, it is essential that all processes are kept peaceful and orderly.
Background of the case
It should be remembered that in connection with the election of Chief Minister of Punjab on July 22, Deputy Speaker Dost Mohammad Mazari rejected 10 votes cast by the members of Muslim League (Q) in favor of Chaudhry Pervez Elahi.
He had ruled that the said votes were cast in violation of the orders of party chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, as a result of which Hamza Shehbaz was once again elected as the Chief Minister of Punjab.
After an unexpected turn in the Punjab Assembly session, the Lahore Registry of the Supreme Court was opened at midnight to receive the petition of the Muslim League (Q) on the instructions of the Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Atta Bandyal.
Read more: Election of Chief Minister Punjab: Muslim League (Q) approached the Supreme Court late at night
After which Chaudhry Parvez Elahi challenged the decision of the Deputy Speaker in the Supreme Court through Muslim League (Q) lawyer Amir Saeed Ran.
While hearing the said application on July 23, a 3-member bench headed by Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial, comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Muneeb Akhtar, directed Hamza Shehbaz to work as a trustee of the Chief Minister till Monday.
Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial remarked that the Deputy Speaker's ruling in Badi-Nazar is against the Supreme Court's decision, however, the court adjourned the hearing till Monday.
The Supreme Court in the order issued after the hearing said that Hamza Shehbaz will act according to the constitution and law and will not use the powers as Chief Minister, which will give him political advantage.
No comments
Thanks