ISLAMABAD: Caught in a constitutional impasse as a result of a mix of political action and judicial intervention, Pakistan remains on tenterhooks. Supreme court Debate on the validity of the no-confidence motion against the PM on Monday Imran being rejected by mine National AssemblyThe Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha decided to adjourn the hearing before a five-member bench so that more arguments could be made.
Chief Justice Omar Att BandiyalThose who filed suo motu case on Sunday soon after the President dissolved the National Assembly on Imran’s recommendation and ordered status quo, raised hopes of an “appropriate order” being passed by the bench on Monday.
Opposition counsel Farooq H Naik began the day’s proceedings by requesting the court to constitute a full bench, a plea which was dismissed by Chief Justice Bandiyal citing the possibility of delay in other matters.
The five-member bench observed during the debate that there was “violation” in the proceedings of the no-confidence motion in the lower house of Parliament. The Chief Justice, who heads the bench, observed that the customary debate before the vote on the no-confidence motion was dropped as Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri handed over the floor to the Information Minister. Fawad Chaudhry and almost immediately accepted his argument that the move to overthrow the government was orchestrated by a “foreign power”.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar questioned the constitutional authority of the deputy speaker to pass such a decision. “I don’t think the deputy speaker can give such a decision, only the speaker can do that,” he said. “When the speaker is unavailable for any reason, the deputy speaker presides over a session,” the judge said. Opposition counsel Naik told the court that the demand notice and the no-confidence motion for the National Assembly session were presented on March 8. The Speaker was bound to convene the session within 14 days, but the meeting was called on March 27.”
To this, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail said that it was not appropriate to the case when the session was called. Then Justice Akhtar said that the speaker has given reasons for the delay. “You can argue whether the reasons given were true or false,” the judge told Naik.
Chief Justice Bandiyal questioned the absence of opposition leaders from the parliamentary committee and briefed on the alleged foreign conspiracy besides the importance and relevance of such a meeting.
Before adjourning the hearing till Tuesday, Naik requested the court to deliver its verdict without delay, pointing out that President Dr Arif Alvi has already sought names of potential candidates for the role of caretaker PM till the general elections are held. Were. The top court said it cannot decide the matter without hearing everyone.
Chief Justice Bandiyal remarked, “The ruling cannot come out of the air.”
Justice Ijazul Ahsan said the court’s decision would have far-reaching implications; Therefore, it could not arrive at a hasty decision without giving an opportunity to all the parties to present their arguments.
As the country plunged into political turmoil, the court barred all state institutions from taking any “extra-constitutional” steps.
Chief Justice Omar Att BandiyalThose who filed suo motu case on Sunday soon after the President dissolved the National Assembly on Imran’s recommendation and ordered status quo, raised hopes of an “appropriate order” being passed by the bench on Monday.
Opposition counsel Farooq H Naik began the day’s proceedings by requesting the court to constitute a full bench, a plea which was dismissed by Chief Justice Bandiyal citing the possibility of delay in other matters.
The five-member bench observed during the debate that there was “violation” in the proceedings of the no-confidence motion in the lower house of Parliament. The Chief Justice, who heads the bench, observed that the customary debate before the vote on the no-confidence motion was dropped as Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri handed over the floor to the Information Minister. Fawad Chaudhry and almost immediately accepted his argument that the move to overthrow the government was orchestrated by a “foreign power”.
Justice Muneeb Akhtar questioned the constitutional authority of the deputy speaker to pass such a decision. “I don’t think the deputy speaker can give such a decision, only the speaker can do that,” he said. “When the speaker is unavailable for any reason, the deputy speaker presides over a session,” the judge said. Opposition counsel Naik told the court that the demand notice and the no-confidence motion for the National Assembly session were presented on March 8. The Speaker was bound to convene the session within 14 days, but the meeting was called on March 27.”
To this, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail said that it was not appropriate to the case when the session was called. Then Justice Akhtar said that the speaker has given reasons for the delay. “You can argue whether the reasons given were true or false,” the judge told Naik.
Chief Justice Bandiyal questioned the absence of opposition leaders from the parliamentary committee and briefed on the alleged foreign conspiracy besides the importance and relevance of such a meeting.
Before adjourning the hearing till Tuesday, Naik requested the court to deliver its verdict without delay, pointing out that President Dr Arif Alvi has already sought names of potential candidates for the role of caretaker PM till the general elections are held. Were. The top court said it cannot decide the matter without hearing everyone.
Chief Justice Bandiyal remarked, “The ruling cannot come out of the air.”
Justice Ijazul Ahsan said the court’s decision would have far-reaching implications; Therefore, it could not arrive at a hasty decision without giving an opportunity to all the parties to present their arguments.
As the country plunged into political turmoil, the court barred all state institutions from taking any “extra-constitutional” steps.