Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Umar Ata Bandial observed that not counting the vote of an MNA during the no-confidence motion against a prime minister would be “scornful”, while stating that Article 63-A of the Constitution details the complete procedure for a lawmakers’ disqualification, with the real question being the duration of disqualification.

The chief justice made these remarks during a larger-bench hearing of the presidential reference seeking the top court’s interpretation of article 63-A of the Constitution and the Supreme Court Bar Association’s petition for peaceful execution of the no-trust motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan.

CJP Bandial is heading the five-member bench which includes Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Jamal Mandokhail.

At the onset of the hearing Senator Raza Rabbani appeared on the rostrum as he had submitted a plea in the apex court to make him a party in the case. Later, during the hearing, the Supreme Court rejected the Pakistan People’s Party leader’s plea on the grounds that he belonged to a political party and that he could not be made an assistant to the court in the case.

The CJP assured Rabbani that the apex court would listen to the former Senate chairperson’s point of view on the case.

SCBA plea

In his arguments on the SCBA’s plea, Attorney General Khalid Javed Khan said the opposition party Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam—Fazl and the ruling PTI had contacted the Islamabad administration. He pointed out that the JUI-F had chosen the Kashmir Highway, an important road leading to the airport, while requesting the apex court to issue an order of “peace” during the protest.

He added that the law requires political parties to wrap up campaignig 48 hours ahead of the voting process.

In his defence, Advocate Kamran Murtaza, who is representing JUI-F in the case, said it was clarified in the request that the opposition party would follow law and order situation in the country and that the public gathering as well as the protest of the party would be “peaceful”.

Presidential reference

Giving arguments on the presidential reference, the AGP gave reference to a 1999 Supreme Court decision and said if an MNA, who won a seat in the National Assembly on a party ticket and he affirmed the manifesto of the same party, wanted to switch the associations, he would have resigned first.

He added that members of a party were bound to follow the directions issued by the party on the election of a prime minister and no-confidence motion against him under Article 63-A of the Constitution.

The AGP cited Article 17 and 18 of the Constitution which empowers an individual to cast an independent vote, saying there was difference in laws between voting for an individual and members of an assembly.

AGP Khan said the political parties are basis of the party system and in the past the apex court has issued observation to bar dissent from party policy.

At this Justice Ahsan noted that the same matter was raised by the government in the Senate elections reference.

In his observation, Justice Mandokhail observed the right to vote had been granted to “members of the assembly” and not “leaders of the party”. Article 63-A of the Constitution was added to make the party discipline mandatory, he added.

Justice Akhtar remarked that political parties are institutions which become weak by violating party discipline. A political party would be scattered if the members did not follow the party line, he added.

Raising questions on the issue, Justice Mandokhail remarked whether MNAs were not answerable to people in their constituencies besides their party leadership. He inquired to what extent the party discipline should be followed.

At this the AGP said the MNAs had the option to resign and appear for re-election, if their voice was not being heard in the party.

Justice Mian Khail remarked that ruling party’s Tiger force equipped with sticks was “unfortunate”.

With reference to the attack on the Sindh House in Islamabad, Advocate General Sindh told the court that the federal capital police had recorded the statement of the provincial government in the case, while the officials were contended with the measures taken by the Islamabad police.

The court also issued notices to the provincial government on the presidential reference and asked them to submit written response in the case which would assist the court in the decision.

The apex court will continue hearing the case on Friday.