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

Supreme Court of Pakistan, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Aqeel Ahmad Abbasi, OGDCL pension case, appellate jurisdiction, additional pension directive, constitutional right to pension, Articles 9 and 14, fundamental rights, retired employee, Islamabad High Court judgment set aside, compliance warning, judicial intervention, deferred wages, employee entitlements, dignity and livelihood, constitutional justice, corporate accountability

SC Terms Pension a Constitutional Right – Directs OGDCL to Immediately Pay Petitioner Arrears

ISLAMABAD – While exercising appellate jurisdiction, a two-member bench of the top court comprising Justice…

legal battle, stay order, PHA Officers Residencia, Islamabad, Civil Court, green spaces, housing plots, CDA, PHA-F, Barrister Umer Ijaz Gilani, urban conservation, layout plan, illegal plots, rainwater drainage, urban flooding, citizens' rights, legal victory, Civil Judge Malik Aman, public hearing, Pakistan

Court Halts PHA’s Plan to Convert Green Spaces For Residential Plots

ISLAMABAD – In a significant development for urban conservation, residents of PHA Officers Residencia have…

IHC Seeks Islamabad Chief Commissioner Response over Unfilled Posts

ISLAMABAD – The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Monday sought clarification from Chief Commissioner of the…