Dy Speaker’s ruling: SC seeks to wrap up case today

0
321

The hearing was adjourned till Thursday morning after the courts failed to reach a judgment

Special Correspondent

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court adjourned the hearing on the “unconstitutional” ruling by National Assembly Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri to impede the vote of no-confidence against Prime Minister Imran Khan for the fourth consecutive day.

The CJP had taken suo motu notice of the constitutional crisis that erupted after Suri disallowed voting on the motion, deeming it “unconstitutional” — a move that the Opposition said was a blatant violation of the Constitution.

At the outset of the hearing, PML-N‘s counsel Nazeer Tarar maintained that the Punjab advocate-general had assured to hold the provincial assembly session today.

“Punjab Assembly deputy speaker’s directives are not being implemented.”

Responding to this, CJP Bandial said that a very important case is being heard in this court.

“We first want to wrap up the case on what happened in the NA on April 3,” the CJP remarked.

However, Tarar argued, “Punjab Assembly’s matter is the extension of Islamabad’s case.”

At this, the chief justice said that “negative statements” are being issued against the court and it is being said that the court is delaying the matter.

“We have to decide after listening to everyone’s stance.[…] will look into Punjab assembly’s matter in the end.”

CJP Bandial said that the court will ask the Punjab advocate-general under which law the Assembly session was adjourned.

Meanwhile, PTI’s counsel Babar Awan resumed his arguments, saying that he wants to put some points before the court.

“I believe that no point will be disregarded in this case.”

Awan and counsels representing other respondents — PPP, PML-N,  Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), Sindh High Court Bar, Attorney General of Pakistan and Advocate General of Punjab — had presented their arguments before the court in Tuesday’s hearing as well.

Awan referred to the verdict by Justice Faez Isa on the minorities.

He objected that all the political parties are a party in this case except for MQM-P, PTM, Balochistan Awami Party and Jamat-e-Islami and Rah-e-Haq party.

He went on to say that the case is whether the NA speaker’s act was illegal.

“The political parties maintain that they have been declared traitors under Article 5 of the Constitution. […]. The court was asked to interpret Article 2.”

At this, CJP Bandial said that no one has been termed a traitor with regards to Article 5 but the action taken under Article 5 has been stated as treason. He said that the Constitution is such a document in which the clauses and sections are read together.

“There is a separate interpretation for Article 95,” the judge added.

Awan said that no one said a single word about Article 63A.