The Supreme Court on Monday resumed hearing a presidential reference seeking its interpretation of Article 63-A, which is related to the disqualification of lawmakers over defection.
A five-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, is hearing the reference.
The PML-N had earlier filed an application, requesting the court to put off the hearing till May 17 since the party’s counsel, Makhdoom Ali Khan, would be out of the country till then.
When the hearing resumed today, the chief justice directed that Khan be asked to return to the country sooner.
Justice Ahsan observed that all parties would be bound to respect the court’s decision.
The chief justice remarked that it was the court’s duty to protect the Constitution, adding that the interpretation of Article 63-A was essential for parliamentary democracy.
He further remarked that suo motu notice was taken at the bench’s discretion and not on anyone’s wishes.
Referring to the apex court’s decision to take suo motu notice of the political situation in the country following then National Assembly deputy speaker Qasim Suri’s dismissal of a no-confidence motion against then prime minister Imran Khan and the subsequent dissolution of the NA — which was later overturned — on April 3, Justice Bandial said consultations had been held with 12 judges beforehand.
Everyone believed that it was a constitutional matter so notice should be taken, he elaborated.
Meanwhile, PTI’s counsel, Babar Awan, said he wanted to assist the apex court in the case, adding that he “greatly respected” the court.
Justice Mandokhail remarked that the same respect should be spread among the public. “Tell the people that the court also opens at night. The Balochistan High Court also opened at 2:30am.”
Awan replied that it (having the public respect the judiciary) was the information ministry’s job, arguing that Articles 62 and 63 should be read together.
Following his ouster, PTI Chairman Imran had, in a rally on April 13, asked the judiciary to explain why it felt the need to open its doors at midnight on April 12, hours before the voting on the no-confidence motion took place.
The IHC has since explained that “as a constitutional court, it ensures that cases relating to extreme urgency are presented at any time after the notified timings.”
The high court’s decision to resume court activity at the unusual hour came after a pre-emptive petition was filed asking the court to restrain Imran from de-notifying Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa as chief of the army staff. The then government had denied having any such plans.
