Deputy Speaker’s ruling to reject No Confidence Motion was wrong: CJP
Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial has declared that the deputy speaker’s ruling link to reject no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan was “wrong”.
The top judge, however, asked the lawyers to assist the court for “solution” in the future. “One thing is clear which is the deputy speaker’s ruling link is wrong, what will be the next stem,” he inquired.
Justice Bandial said that the five-judge larger bench will pronounce its verdict link the rejection of the no-confidence motion today.
During the hearing, the CJ mentioned that the court will have to look after the national interest.
Earlier, the Supreme Court link judges gave a pretty hard time to the lawyers of president, prime minister and speaker who defended the National Assembly Deputy Speaker link Qasim Suri’s ruling link no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan.
During the course of proceedings, Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial observed that apparently constitution was violated in the Assembly. “If the voting had been allowed, then it would have become clear who is the prime minister. Prime Minister cannot dissolve the assembly if a no-confidence motion is tabled. What would be the consequences if the prime minister violates Article 58,” the CJP asked.
The top judge remarked anyone who is losing a no-trust vote tomorrow can opt for new elections.
Justice Bandial said “There is no crisis in the country. Billions are spent on the new elections and the country also passes from a tough situation during the 90 days. We should think of the country.”
A five-member larger bench of the SC, headed by the CJP, heard the case. The judges on the bench are Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ejazul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam, Justice Muneeb Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel.
Justice Jamal Mandokhel observed that the court could not sit mum if there was a violation of the constitution. Is the no-trust issue not affecting the public? Is there any protection for unconstitutional steps? Do we sitting here let such unconstitutional steps go by?”
Justice Mandokhel further asked can the prime minister advise the president dissolution if the majority of the assembly oppose it?
Justice Mandokhel also pointed out that the minutes of the parliamentary committee meeting, which were submitted to court by speaker's lawyer Naeem Bukhari, didn't prove if the deputy speaker link was present. Continuing, Justice Mandokhel asked whether the foreign minister was present during the parliamentary committee meeting, noting that his signature was not included in the record.
"Shouldn't the foreign minister have been present?" the judge asked, which prompted the lawyer to admit the minister should have been present.
At this, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial pointed out that Moeed Yusuf's name was also not included in the record.
Justice Ijazul Hassan said the assembly could have reversed the deputy speaker’s ruling link had it not been dissolved. “Prime Minister cashed in on the opportunity and dissolve the assembly,” he added.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar remarked was the prime minister aware of the deputy speaker’s ruling link that he was sitting ready to address the nation. “It was not in speaker’s powers to rejected no-trust move through ruling link,” he added.
He asked was not it like that the written ruling link was given to the deputy speaker link. “The deputy speaker link gave the ruling link how come it carried the signature of the speaker,” he baffled.
Justice Muneeb further asked why the voting was not conducted after the ruling link?