ISLAMABAD
\nJustice Ijazul Ahsan said on Tuesday that a lawmaker would remain disqualified until a court cancelled the declaration for his disqualification.
\nAccording to dawn.com, He made the comments as a five-member bench headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, and also comprising Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, resumed hearing the presidential reference seeking the apex court\u2019s interpretation of Article 63-A of the Constitution, which is related to disqualification of lawmakers over defection.
\nDuring today\u2019s hearing, PTI\u2019s lawyer Babar Awan presented his arguments on behalf of party chief Imran Khan. He argued that those who were defaulting on the payment of their utility bills were also not eligible to become a member of parliament.
\n\u201cIf the time period is not determined then the disqualification is for life,\u201d he contended.
\nAt this, Justice Mandokhail asked whether the lawmaker would continue to remain disqualified if they paid their outstanding utility bills before the next election.
\nJustice Ahsan said that the lawmakers\u2019 disqualification would end once the outstanding dues are paid. Only disqualification under Article 62(1)(f), which sets the precondition for a member of parliament to be \u2018Sadiq\u2019 and Ameen\u2019 (honest and righteous) \u2014 is life-long, he observed.
\nBut, he added, that the \u201cdisqualification will remain in place until the declaration is cancelled by the court\u201d. \u201cDisqualification for the non-payment of utility bills cannot be for life,\u201d Justice Ahsan added.
\nAwan went on to say that it was an affront to Article 63-A if a lawmaker was de-seated and then returned to parliament within 15 days to perhaps become a minister.
\nJustice Mandokhail replied by telling Awan to carry out law reforms. \u201cThe door of repentance is always open,\u201d he stated.
\nJustice Miankhel called on the counsel to read Article 63(1)(g) of the Constitution. \u201cYou are asking us to declare dissident lawmakers disqualified for life,\u201d he said, to which Awan replied that it was a \u201cserious crime\u201d.
\n\u201cIn my eyes, the violation of Article 63(1)(g) is a more serious crime,\u201d Justice Miankhel replied, adding that it concerned the ridiculing of the judiciary and the army as well as the ideology of Pakistan.
\nArticle 63(1)(g) says that a member of the parliament stands disqualified from the membership of the parliament if he has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction for propagating any opinion, or acting in any manner, that is prejudicial to the integrity or independence of the judiciary of Pakistan, or which defames the judiciary or brings it into ridicule.
\nThe observation by the judge comes amid criticism of the judiciary by the PTI chairman, who has been questioning why courts opened their doors late in the night before his ousters prime minister through a no-confidence motion. The judiciary has defended its actions, with the Islamabad High Court stating that matters of extreme urgency can be brought to the attention of the court at any time.
\nDuring the hearing, Justice Akhtar also asked how Article 63-A was related to Article 62(1)(f). Awan replied that his argument was that Article 63-A itself disqualified dissident lawmakers for life.
\n\u201cShould 26 lawmakers be allowed to abandon the party?\u201d he asked. In this way, the party with the majority would come in the minority, he said.
\n\u201cYou want the (interpretation of) Article 63-A to be so rigid that no lawmaker can defect,\u201d Justice Ahsan observed.
\nThe PTI counsel argued that a \u201csurgical strike\u201d was inserted in Article 63-A under the 18th Amendment to get rid of the cancer that was defection. He added that the 18th Amendment was unanimously passed by parliament.
\nAt one point, he also gave the reference of the SC verdict which legitimised former military ruler General Pervez Musharraf\u2019s martial law. \u201cThe apex court gave Musharraf the power to amend the Constitution,\u201d he said, adding that the powers of the court were unlimited.
\n\u201cSome say the judiciary should be independent while others say it should be subservient to the Constitution. Parliament, the judiciary and the executive should all be subservient to the Constitution,\u201d Justice Mandokhail said.
\nOnly the judiciary can ensure everyone is subservient to the Constitution, Awan responded. The judiciary not only interprets the Constitution but also makes laws clear with its decisions, he said.
\nOnce Awan concluded his arguments, the lawyer for the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q), Azhar Siddique, began his arguments.
\nHe told the court that British lawmakers resign even if they are suspected of indulging in corruption worth a mere one pound. On the other hand, those disqualified by our courts for not being saqdiq and ameen are not ready to accept the verdict, he said.
\nJustice Mandokhail asked whether an independent lawmaker took an oath when they joined a political party. \u201cDoes the independent lawmaker swear to abide by the party\u2019s each and every decision?\u201d he asked.
\nThe PML-Q\u2019s counsel replied that the lawmaker accepts all the conditions before joining the party.
\nJustice Mandokhail also stated that Article 63-A provides a forum for taking action against dissident members. Siddique added that dissident lawmakers could also not cast their vote.
\nAt one point, Justice Mandokhail observed that the punishment under Article 63-A was to rescind the membership of the dissident lawmaker. \u201cDo you want to increase the punishment for a dissident lawmaker?\u201d he asked.
\nSiddique replied by saying that his argument did not concern the extension in the lawmaker\u2019s punishment. \u201cArticle 63-A is a protective wall against a no-confidence motion,\u201d he argued.
\nDuring the hearing, Justice Ahsan also observed that it had become \u201ctradition\u201d for a government to be overthrown by throwing money at people. \u201cThe future of 220 million people is put at stake with the buying and selling of a few people,\u201d he said.
\nJustice Ahsan also observed that the practice of buying and selling lawmakers with the purpose of overthrowing the government should come to an end.
\nDuring the hearing the PML-Q\u2019s counsel also referred to the Charter of Democracy \u2014 a 36-point document signed by the PPP and PML-N in May 2006, primarily with the aim to end dictatorship.
\nTo this, Justice Mandokhail remarked that it would have been a part of the Constitution if all parliamentary parties had been in agreement over the document.
\nHe further said that no one had barred the party leader from punishing dissidents members. The party leader is only required to specify that the member has defected, he said.
\nResuming his arguments, Siddique said that departmental inquiries should be initiated against the corrupt, as well as criminal proceedings.
\n\u201cWould it not be more appropriate that action is taken once horsetrading and corruption are proven?\u201d asked Justice Mandokhail. Siddique, however, contended that proving corruption and defection were separate matters.
\nJustice Mandokhail also pointed out that two of the PML-Q\u2019s members had voted against the party line but the PML-Q chief had opted not to take action.
\nJustice Ahsan went on to say that horsetrading posed a risk to \u201cdemocracy and the system\u201d. \u201cIt is not possible that one resorts to wrongdoing and then also benefits from it. How can those guilty of a crime be allowed to benefit from it?\u201d he wondered.
\nAt one point, Justice Mandokhail also remarked that deviation from the party policy could also be in favour of the country.
\nFollowing this, the court adjourned the hearing till 12pm tomorrow (Wednesday), directing Siddique to complete his arguments within 15 minutes.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
ISLAMABAD Justice Ijazul Ahsan said on Tuesday that a lawmaker would remain disqualified until a court cancelled the declaration for his disqualification. According to dawn.com, He made the comments as a five-member bench headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, and also comprising Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":259793,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[44,7073,7072],"class_list":{"0":"post-259766","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-national","8":"tag-court","9":"tag-disqualified","10":"tag-justice-ijazul-ahsan"},"yoast_head":"\n