Islamabad :
A five-member larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Omar Ata Bandial heard the suo motu notice taken on the matter and petitions of various parties.
In the hearing of the case related to the rolling of the Deputy Speaker in the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Omar Ata Bandial has said that the court is being accused of not making a decision, how can one give a unilateral decision? At the same time, he asked PTI lawyer Babar Awan where are the minutes of the National Security Committee meeting.
At the beginning of the hearing, PML-N lawyer Azam Nazir Tarar said that the situation in Lahore is tense. Will not be
The Chief Justice said that a very important case is being heard today, an attempt is being made to settle the case, the court is being accused of not making a decision, try to resolve the issue politically, how can one give a unilateral decision. Are there
During the hearing, PTI lawyer Babar Awan argued that the decision of the British court quoted in the case does not apply in the case, can the constitution of Pakistan be compared with the constitutions of India, Australia and England. ?
He said that what happened in Sindh House and Awari Hotel Lahore can be ignored? I will also give a note of Qur’an and Sunnah and Mufti Taqi Usmani on the role of members of the Assembly. No one said a word on Article 63A, they claim that the parliamentarians are trying to save democracy.
He said that the PML-N president had demanded the formation of the commission through a press conference. Also release
In an interview with PTI lawyer, the Chief Justice asked whether the Speaker has the power to deviate from the Order of the Day, whether the Speaker has the power to destroy the constitutional provision of no-confidence, whether the Speaker has constitutional requirements. Can be set aside.
He said that we will not go for rumors and accusations, don’t tell us long stories, don’t tell us the routes, we will find the routes ourselves, tell us on what basis the speaker gave the rolling.
Babar Awan told the court that there are three parts of the case, the first part is before the no-confidence motion, the second part is related to the rolling of the speaker about which Naeem Bukhari will give arguments and the third part is after the rolling. The arguments will be related to MNC.
Justice Omar Ata Bandial was asked what MNC is, to which Babar Awan replied that MNC stands for Motion of No Confidence, the Chief Justice said that it could also mean a multinational corporation.
The Chief Justice’s remarks caused laughter in the courtroom.
The Chief Justice said that tell us why the Speaker gave the rolling motion, give us arguments on the point whether the Speaker has the power to destroy the constitutional provision of no-confidence.
The Chief Justice further said that we have to see whether the Speaker has the power to deviate from the agenda in the House and move on to any other issue, there is a constitutional way to sideline it, can it ?
The Chief Justice said that the courts run according to the law, an allegation has been made in this case, the Deputy Speaker has taken a step, come to the facts, want to know before making a decision what is the conspiracy on the basis of which Rolling. was given.
Babar Awan said that the meeting is held and its cipher arrives in Pakistan on March 7. The meeting was attended by three diplomats including the Deputy Head of Mission, Defense Attach.
The court inquired whether the word decipher was used in the information codes or in a sealed envelope. On this Babar Awan said that I do it in such a way that our Foreign Office looks at it.
Babar Awan said that a meeting is called in which Foreign Secretary is not available, all citizens must be loyal to the state, Article 4 gives the same rights to foreign citizens as Pakistanis, any in the world. Foreigners have not been given such rights in the country. The case pending in the court is not about fundamental rights.
The court further asked whether the Speaker could go beyond Article 95 with a rolling motion which is not on the agenda, must defend the Speaker’s rolling but on concrete material, where are the minutes of the National Security Council meeting?
Justice Omar Ata Bandial said that the Deputy Speaker has come to a conclusion in the rolling, on what material the Deputy Speaker exercised his authority, speak the facts before the court.
Babar Awan said that the letter comes after the meeting of Head of Mission, Deputy Head of Mission, Defense Attach ،. We received the report on March 7.
The Chief Justice said that when the meeting of the Head of Mission took place, you do not have the date of the meeting, the rolling is based on allegations instead of facts.
Babar Awan said that the letter said that the other country was not happy with our Prime Minister. The letter said that if the no-confidence motion failed, what would be the consequences.
The Attorney General objected to the arguments of the lawyer PTI and said that it would be appropriate for the lawyer of any political party not to talk about foreign policy.
وگا۔
The Chief Justice further said that the point of the Attorney General is also correct, we also do not want to get involved in foreign policy matters.
Babar Awan said that four things came to light in the letter, the official could not give more details under the Secret Act, Foreign Office after seeing the letter met with the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, in the cabinet meeting the relevant DG gave a briefing on the letter. Was
The Chief Justice inquired when the meeting of the Federal Cabinet was held. Babar Awan said that he will know the date of the cabinet meeting. The Foreign Ministry briefs the cabinet meeting by making a note from the cipher. I have prepared a brief which I can show in the camera hearing.
The Chief Justice said that at present he was not asking for the letter and at the same time rejected the request of Babar Awan for these camera briefings and said that at present there is nothing to hear these cameras.
Babar Awan, while presenting the conversation of the Pakistan Army spokesman on private TV in the court, said that the Pakistan Army spokesman said that he agreed with the announcement of the National Security Committee meeting.
Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that let the Speaker’s lawyer do these things, no doubt every citizen should be loyal to the state, what action was taken against those who were accused?
Babar Awan said that the government has not taken any action against them, PTI has decided to take action against its members, Pakistan is first, the Prime Minister and the cabinet acted carefully, I am also taking precautions. ۔
Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that political parties should also think for themselves, you should focus on arguments and not de-track.
Lawyer PTI said that there is a deadlock in the formation of caretaker government, so Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that is why they are asking you to give arguments quickly, we have taken an oath to protect the constitution, we will give the decision that It will be in the interest of the nation.
When the arguments of PTI lawyer Babar Awan were completed, then the lawyer of the President Barrister Ali Zafar started his arguments.
Barrister Ali Zafar said that the case under discussion is about interpretation of Articles 95 and 69. Six principles have been laid down for interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution. The provisions of the Constitution should be understood according to its true spirit instead of words
He said that the court proceedings could not be brought under discussion in the Parliament and thus the courts could not interfere in the privileges of the Parliament. Unfortunately, the petitioners wanted the case to be heard as an appeal against the rolling of the Deputy Speaker.
The president’s lawyer said that the case was in fact an interference in the prerogatives of the parliament. The Supreme Court could examine the law made by the parliament but could not intervene. Can’t even be challenged.
The Chief Justice said that he was saying that a new Speaker should come and voting should be held again. Can the Speaker also dissolve the entire Parliament?
Ali Zafar said that the speaker can do this, rolling cannot be returned.
The President objected to the admissibility of the petitions filed under Article 184/3.
Barrister Ali Zafar said that if a case is pending in the court then the parliament does not comment on it, the court also does not interfere in the proceedings of the parliament, in this case the speaker has also been made a party.
He said that any direction from the court would exceed its jurisdiction, to approach the court against the rolling of the deputy speaker is interference in the parliament, the instructions given to the speaker must actually be given to the parliament which is unconstitutional.
The Chief Justice pointed out that if Parliament violates the Constitution, can there be no interference even then? Barrister Ali Zafar further said that I will give arguments later on whether it is unconstitutional or not. Justice Maqbool Baqir on his retirement spoke about balance in institutions. Only mutual respect can create balance in institutions.
He further said that if the House is not satisfied with the Speaker then it can distrust him. If the Speaker’s rolling is reviewed then every decision of the Speaker will come in the court. The court does not have the power to review the Speaker’s rolling.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan asked if the advice of the Prime Minister to dissolve the Assembly could be reviewed.
Barrister Ali Zafar said that if the advice to dissolve the assembly is as a result of rolling then it cannot be reviewed.
Parliament should be given a chance to solve its own problems.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar asked whether the election of the Prime Minister is part of the parliamentary proceedings. Barrister Ali Zafar said that the election of the Prime Minister under Article 91 is part of the parliamentary process.
Barrister Ali Zafar said the court could only consider the no-confidence motion if it was not a parliamentary proceeding. Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that if the vote is valid and the Speaker announces the success of the no-confidence motion, what will happen?
The president’s lawyer added that these may be parliamentary issues but the court cannot be a monitor on parliament.
The Chief Justice said that your point is interesting that even if the rolling of the speaker is wrong, he has the right to do so. What’s wrong with going public?
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan said that how the rights of anyone are being affected by going to the polls?
Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that Article 5 speaks of loyalty to the state, sub-article 2 of Article 5 speaks of observance of the Constitution, observance of the Constitution is obligatory on all.
