Islamabad :
At the hearing of the presidential reference on the interpretation of Article 63A, the BNP’s counsel argued that Article 95 allows members to vote without party discipline, to which Chief Justice Omar Ata Bandial remarked that it was out of discipline. By voting, the political party will become a ‘tea party’.
A five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial heard the presidential reference for interpretation of Article 63A.
During the hearing, Balochistan National Party lawyer Mustafa Ramday told the court that Article 63A contains all the procedures.
He asserted that his confession had been obtained through torture and that his confession had been obtained through torture. 63A provides for D-set punishment.
The Chief Justice said that you are saying that the punishment of D-seat is sufficient for the deviant members, they do not want to go deeper than the procedure of Article 63A.
PNP’s lawyer said that adding more punishment with D-seat would increase political divisions, on which the Chief Justice remarked that the Election Commission had rejected the reference regarding members of the National Assembly. That half of the members of a political party voted on one side while half of the members voted on the other side. This political party did not take any action against its members.
The Chief Justice remarked that the Constitution promotes democracy and strengthens the political party. In most cases, the party chief does not take action on deviations. Article 63A does not save any political party but the system.
Justice Omar Ata Bandial said that there is a political party and its members have never deviated from the policy so Article 63A also protects the rights of a political party.
The Chief Justice said that if any member of the Assembly deviates in the last six months, then in such a situation the member was not punished.
Lawyer Mustafa Ramday said that even party chiefs do not take action against deviant members, the court should also take into account the conduct of party leaders, to which the Chief Justice said that deviant members may persuade their party chief to take action. ۔
The lawyer claimed that our political parties do not have such democracy, the political party has the doctorate of the leader.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan remarked that if every member will do as he pleases then how can democracy be promoted. Why not focus on the system instead of focusing on one individual. , 15 members can change the whole system?
He asked if a few people could derail the system.
On this occasion, the lawyer of Mustafa Ramday said that the observation of the court is of great importance, it is also to see who the individual is, under Article 95 the members have the right to vote for him.
He said that he would defend a defecting member. Will increasing the punishment of Article 63A promote democracy, increasing the punishment will increase the dictatorship of the party chief, the court should also look into these things.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan remarked that it is better to resign than to deviate. By resigning, the system will also be saved.
Continuing his speech, he said that for the interpretation of the constitution, all aspects of the matter will be examined. Does
Lawyer Mustafa Ramday said that the party chief who had no confidence in the Chief Minister of Balochistan did not give show cause notice to anyone.
On this occasion, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel allows the deviation of the Constitution? Is it possible to assess the nature of the deviation, will the vote be counted or not?
The lawyer said that the former Attorney General Khalid Javed did not insist on the argument of not counting the votes, every time the shoulders of the court are used, it is the job of the parliament why the parliament does not do its job.
Justice Ijaz-ul-Hassan said that our shoulder is not so weak, our shoulder is the constitution of Pakistan, the power of interpretation belongs to the Supreme Court, the job of the court is to protect and interpret the constitution.
He said that the court has to see what kind of question has been raised in the petition, the first question of the court is to make the petition admissible, under the constitution it is our responsibility to interpret the constitution.
The Chief Justice said that whether the constitution allows a member to violate the instructions of the parliamentary party by conspiring with the party chief, the party chief may not take action against the member if he does not follow the instructions of the parliamentary party.
He said that the directives of the parliamentary party should be respected, lest the party chief revoke the directives of the parliamentary party.
On the occasion, the Balochistan National Party chief said that the system would not be destroyed if the members resigned due to differences.
Justice Jamal Khan remarked that deviation of members does not end the system, Article 63A is a complete code.
The BNP lawyer said that it was a fact that the party chief revoked the directives of the parliamentary party, adding that Article 63 sets the AD by not voting on dissent.
Stops
Justice Mazhar Alam Mian Khel said that this means that the language of Article 63A is very clear.
He said that out of 200 countries in the world, 32 countries have anti-deviation laws, out of these 32 countries, only 6 countries have this law in place. If there is work then why the constitution allows deviation.
Mustafa Ramday said that this reference has been sent for political interest, Article 63A to Article 95 can not be made ineffective.
The Chief Justice remarked that does Article 95 allow members to vote against their Prime Minister? On which the lawyer said that Article 95 allows members to vote outside the party discipline.
The Chief Justice said that with this argument you have eliminated the political party, in this way the political party will become a tea party.
The Chief Justice said that if the chief can forgive the wrongdoing of the party, if the party chief forgives the wrongdoing of the member, it will be unconstitutional, does the directive of the parliamentary party not matter.
During the hearing, Shamail Butt said that Article 63A should be read in conjunction with Article 62. No provision of the Constitution is for beauty. Reading Article 63A along with Article 62A would have serious consequences.
He said that even after the parliament, two forums have to review the deviation. If no one comes to the assembly, it is also a deviation.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel said that if the Prime Minister violates the Islamic injunctions, would the member still want him to remain the Prime Minister.
Shamail Butt said that in accordance with the procedure in Article 63A, the Election Commission and the Supreme Court are forums.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel asked whether the Election Commission could say the role of a member was wrong or right on the complaint of the party chief.
The court adjourned the hearing till 11:30 am after the completion of arguments of Advocate General Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Shamail Butt.
