Categories Courts

All eyes are on top court verdict over legality of blocking no-confidence vote against PM Khan

While hearing arguments of PML-N counsel challenging legality of National Assembly’s deputy speaker dismissal of no-confidence motion against prime minister the top court Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial said the court has nothing to do with matters of state and foreign policy but to examine legality of the speaker office act in the matter.

The NA Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri had linked the motion to a “foreign conspiracy” to topple the PTI government and ruled that the motion was contradictory to Article 5 of the Constitution. Subsequently, the CJP had taken suo motu notice of the matter, following which a larger bench was formed to hear the case.

The five-member bench is headed by the CJP and includes Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail.

During the hearing of the matter on Tuesday, the CJP said the court would not interfere in policy matters and would focus on the deputy speaker’s ruling, the PML-N’s counsel proposed that the apex court may seek an “in-camera briefing about the foreign conspiracy from the intelligence chief”. “Right now we are looking at the law and Constitution,” the CJP replied, adding that all the respondents would be told to focus on this matter at the moment.

“We prefer that a decision be taken on this matter only,” CJP Bandial said. “We want to see if the court can review the ruling of the deputy speaker.” The court, he added, didn’t interfere in the state or foreign policy. “We don’t want to indulge in policy matters.”

A member of the bench Justice Ahsan expressed the court only wanted to see constitutional matters for now. The PML-N’s counsel, however, argued that the court could judicially review an illegal and unconstitutional move.

Justice Munib Akhtar said the NA and provincial assembly were masters of their respective houses. The distribution of powers was also enshrined in the constitution, the judge added. “We have referred to six court verdicts that clarify the jurisdiction of Article 69,” Khan said adding that the speaker confirmed the deputy speaker’s ruling. He also questioned the transfer of power from the speaker to the deputy speaker. Justice Ahsan said Naeem Bukhari, the counsel for NA Speaker Asad Qaiser, would aid the court on the matter.

Later, the court adjourned the hearing till 11:30am on Wednesday (tomorrow).

Author

More From Author

You May Also Like

US Court Approves Stay Applications of ICC-Affiliated Law Professors who Challenge Trump Order

Granting stay order in response to plea of two law professors, Federal District Court for…

ATC Jails Senior PTI Leaders for 10 Years; Party Mulls Appeal, House Boycott

Anti-Terrorism Court Faisalabad on Thursday awarded sentence to a group of senior leaders from former…

Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, Omar Ayub Khan, May 9 trials, procedural violations, Anti-Terrorism Courts, judicial inquiry, political persecution, prosecutorial misconduct, Supreme Court Peshawar Registry, unfair trials Pakistan, justice for all, rushed trials, human rights, legal transparency, judicial accountability, Pakistan opposition letter, CJP meeting opposition leader, May 9 suspects, media access trials, legal reform Pakistan, Supreme Court of Pakistan, due process violations, judicial independence, legal system Pakistan

CJP to Meet Omar Ayub Over Alleged Procedural Lacunas in May 9 Trials

Days after Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly, Omar Ayub Khan, wrote a…