Parliamentary system experiencing ‘stress and flux’, says CJP – Pakistan

Advertisement
Advertisement

ISLAMABAD: Pakistani Chief Justice (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial on Wednesday expressed his concern over recent political events, noting that the parliamentary process was marred by “tensions, instability and instability”.

“Everything comes to court and we have to decide in internal disputes,” the CJP noted while listening to a presidential referendum seeking the interpretation of Article 63A of the Constitution, which deals with heresies.

Justice Bandial said the court should decide whether a deviation from the constitution was “an ornament” to the Constitution or to monitor the stability of the system.

The high court has had to rule on whether the ruling given to the head of the party parliament under Article 63A invalidated this provision because it was up to the individual, on the other hand, to remain silent about any sedition by the authorized member and, on the other, to punish a common member.

Justice Bandial has asked a newly appointed Pakistani lawyer (AGP), Ashtar Ausaf, to consider these questions and come up with his own answer on Monday. The AGP said it hoped the court’s decision in the case would put the country’s political system in a stable position.

Justice Munib Akhtar, a member of the bench, cited as examples parliamentary practices common in Britain, Canada, and Australia. These require strict adherence to party policy as a parliamentary democracy cannot survive without it.

The whole system will collapse and “there will be chaos around us”, said Justice Munib.

No party will be able to make its own agenda without training at its level, the judge noted. Article 63A appears to be included in the Constitution to prevent permanent disobedience.

Judge Akhtar further stated that under Article 17, it was the fundamental right of the political party, not the individual, to establish a state.

If a member does not agree with the views of the party, it would be better for the “intellectual opponent” to resign from his seat in parliament and run in the by-elections.

Justice Ahsan explained: “To defend oneself, to deprive a legislator of the seat of assembly for treason is not a punishment.

“The perpetrator should not be allowed to go free because he has tried to undermine the democratic process. Opposition to every individual is a constitutional offense. ”

Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, speaking to PML-Q’s lawyer Azhar Siddique, wondered why the organization had not taken action against its members who had sided with other parties during the crisis last month.

Justice Mandokhel recalled that a member of the Balochistan Congress was recently ousted because of a deviation from the party line during a vote of no confidence in the prime minister, but he later became a senator and was still in the upper house.

Advocate Mansoor Usman Awan, who represents the Supreme Court of the Bar Association (SCBA), argued that lifelong closure or temporary disqualification should not be considered in Article 63A, possibly as a result of reading it and any of the provisions described under Articles. 62 and 63 or independently subject to a decision on appeal lodged by this court under Section 63A (5).

He argued that Article 63A (4) could not have the effect of repeating Article 63 (3), which stipulates that a legislator must be allowed to run in a by-election after being removed from office.

Sitting on the issue that the vote of a member of a political party, Mansoor Awan described the idea as problematic. “The Constitution itself allows members to vote in accordance with their conscience in all matters other than those provided for in Article 63A.”

As for the independent candidates, he pointed out that the Constitution allows them to join a particular party after an election, but then they become dependent on the governing body and face the consequences of resigning in the event of a deviation. He said there was no political party holding by-elections and a few who tried once or twice, gave up.

“Voters do not vote according to party rules only. Often the power of a particular candidate acts as a decree, ”added Mansoor Awan.

Published on Parhlo, May 12, 2022

Leave a Comment