Federal govt, Speaker NA & PPP back the SCBAP’s review plea against the apex court’s May 2022 verdict on Article 63(A)
ISLAMABAD, Oct 01 (SABAH): The federal government, Speaker National Assembly and the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) have backed the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan’s (SCBAP) review plea against the apex court’s May 2022 verdict on Article 63(A). Meanwhile Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf lawyer Barrister Senator Syed Ali Zafar vehemently announced the opposition of the review petition filed by SCBAP.
The top court back then had declared that the dissident members of a parliamentary party cannot cast votes against their party’s directives.
The development comes as a SC larger bench, led by Chief Justice of Pakistan justice Qazi Faez Isa on Tuesday heard the review petition. The newly formed bench comprises Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel.
The existing bench was constituted after Justice Munib Akhtar, on Monday, expressed unavailability from being part of the bench — the reasons for which the latter communicated to the apex court’s registrar in multiple letters.
A day earlier, CJP Isa had adjourned the hearing due to Justice Munib’s absence and said that Justice Munib would be requested to rejoin the bench, which otherwise, would be reconstituted.
At the onset of the hearing on Tuesday, the CJP addressed the bench formation issue and revealed that Justice Munib Akhtar retained his stance regarding his presence on the bench.
On the issue of the judges’ committee, the chief justice said that he recommended including Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and that the puisne judge’s office was office contacted in this regard.
However, owing to Justice Mansoor’s refusal, the CJP said that they were left with no option but to include Justice Afghan in the bench.
Appearing before the court on Tuesday, SCBA President Barrister Muhammad Shahzad Shaukat objected to the 2022 verdict saying that there was a presidential reference under Article 186 of the Constitution and petitions under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.
“How can the judgment be given by combining both? Only an opinion can be given on a presidential reference and not a decision,” responded CJP Isa.
Furthermore, the senior lawyer also argued that the apex court’s 2022 verdict was an attempt to re-write the constitution.
To this, the chief justice remarked: “When the constitution is clear, how can [one] add something to it.”
In response to the top judge’s question whether the said judgment provisioned immediate disqualification of a lawmaker if he votes against party lines, Additional Attorney General Chaudhry Amir Rehman replied in the negative. “No, nothing like that has been said in the judgment,” the AAGP noted.
When asked who opposed and supported the SCBA’s review plea, Pakistan Thereek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) Barrister Senator Syed Ali Zafar said that he was against the petition, whereas the federal government and the PPP said that they supported the review request.
PPP’s lawyer Farooq Hamid Naek said: “The Constitution does not have any provision against counting of [lawmakers’] vote[s].”
Speaker National Assembly’s lawyer Barrister Harris Azmat supported the review petition filed by SCBA.
After hearing the arguments, the chief justice said the court would hear the remaining lawyers tomorrow (Wednesday) and adjourned the hearing till 11:30 AM tomorrow (Wednesday). The chief justice has directed the lawyers to cite the laws of United States, Britain, Canada, Australia, India and other countries of the world regarding the matter. Chief justice said that the court should also be assisted regarding the matter whether the petitions under Article 184-3 and Presidential Reference under Article 186 of the constitution could have been heard by clubbing them.