LAHORE: Supreme Court Saturday allowed Hamza Shahbaz to remain “trustee” chief minister until Monday (July 25) and adjourned proceedings in a plea filed by PML-Q leader Chaudhry Parvez Elahi challenging Deputy Speaker Dost Mohammad Mazari’s yesterday’s ruling.

The court in its ruling also made it clear that Hamza would work in accordance with the law and the Constitution and was not allowed to use his power as chief minister in any way that would benefit him personally.

Earlier Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial presided over a three-member bench formed to hear the petition that challenged the proceedings of the runoff vote to elect the Punjab chief minister that took place a day earlier.

“Tell us, how you rejected 10 votes of PML-Q MPAs,” asked the CJ. “Read the deputy speaker ruling,” he said and advised Punjab Assembly Deputy Speaker Dost Muhammad Mazari’s lawyer Irfan Qadir to read and then read the order.

Qadir sought time from the court to submit answers to the court.

The CJP asked under which order the deputy speaker gave the ruling and stressed that the paragraph concerned must be read out before the court.

“For your assistance, the order starts on page number 81,” he said.

Mazari’s lawyer said that paragraph three of the ruling pertaining to dissident lawmakers was relevant. He added that different interpretations came out from the top court’s ruling

Punjab Assembly Deputy Speaker Dost Muhammad Mazari could not appear in the Supreme Court, his lawyer Irfan Qadir told the apex court on Saturday as he presented answers from his client.

“Where is the [deputy] speaker,” Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial inquired.

The proceedings on the case resumed after a delay as parties in the case took time to reach the court.

The judge called for hearing the case in a different room as there were too many people in the courtroom. The case was delayed for some time.

SC proceedings start after a delay over Mazari’s ruling on the Hamza election

PA deputy speaker’s viewpoint does not give ultimate explanation of SC ruling

Dost Muhammad Mazari, the Punjab Assembly deputy speaker, viewpoint does not give the final interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the apex court’s interim order said.

“This is a matter of the explanation of our past ruling,” it said, “we have to see whether the deputy speaker was on the same page as the SC ruling or not.”

It added that the deputy speaker referenced the larger bench in his ruling, however, he did not point out the paragraph where it was written.

Top court summons PA deputy speaker over Hamza Shehbaz ruling

The Supreme Court’s Lahore Registry summoned, on Saturday, Dost Muhammad Mazari, the Punjab Assembly deputy speaker, in person with a record of the proceedings of the runoff vote to elect the Punjab chief minister that took place a day earlier.

The court issued summons while hearing an application challenging the ruling of the Deputy Speaker Dost Mohammad Mazari on the chief minister’s election.

The case was delayed for 30 hours as some people, who had to appear before the court, had to be called from Islamabad. The PML-N has demanded that a full court bench should be made instead of one with three members.

A three-member bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial declared the petition, which was moved by the PTI and the PML-Q, admissible for hearing by the court. Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar are the other two members of the bench. The petition was filed late on Friday (yesterday) after midnight as the top court opened following a chaotic situation in the Punjab Assembly.

The court summoned Attorney General for Pakistan Ashtar Ausaf, the Punjab advocate general and the provincial chief secretary for the court’s assistance. Punjab CM Hamza Shehbaz has also been summoned while notices have been issued to all parties including the PML-N.

PML-N leader Hamza Shehbaz retained the post of the Punjab chief minister by securing a majority of votes in the election on Friday after the deputy speaker refused to count 10 votes of PML-Q MPAs which brought the parliamentary strength of the opposition alliance to 176 against 179 of Hamza.

“Hamza’s oath does not matter to us,” CJP Bandial observed. He said that the bench has to view all the matters in light of the Constitution. It directed that all the proceedings of Friday’s Punjab Assembly session must be presented in the court.

The deputy speaker refused to count the votes of PML-Q lawmakers, citing a letter from PML-Q chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain. It stated that Elahi had instructed party MPAs not to vote for the PTI-backed candidate - his party member and cousin Pervaiz Elahi. Elahi has since claimed that as the parliamentary head of the party, it is his instructions that the MPAs must follow.

The party leader could only report on the violation of the parliamentary party’s direction, Justice Ijazul Ahsan observed during the hearing. “It is a democratic practice that only the parliamentary party decides who to vote for.”

The deputy speaker had cited Article 63 (1) (A) of the Constitution of Pakistan after PML-Q chief Chaudhry Shujaat directed his party’s lawmakers to cast their votes in favour of Hamza.

“A person shall be disqualified from being elected or chosen as, and from being, a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) if he is of unsound mind and has been so declared by a competent court,” said Article 63 (1) (a) of the Constitution.

Meanwhile, Hamza was sworn in as the chief minister on Saturday, with Punjab Governor Balighur Rehman administering the oath of office.’’

PML-Q argument

Pervaiz Elahi’s lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar told the court that his client bagged 186 votes in the runoff election compared to Hamza’s 178, making him the winner. However, the deputy speaker rejected the 10 votes due to dishonesty, he continued.

“Mazari violated Article 63 (A) of the Constitution,” he said. “Asking a parliamentary leader not to cast votes is contradictory to law.”

He contended that none of the party members had received the letter, and it was a “joke” that 10 votes were rejected. The deputy speaker presented the wrong interpretation of the SC (May 17)’s decision, Zafar argued.

“This issue came to light because of analysis,” CJP Bandial said. “People in the whole country want to hear the proceedings of this case.”

This matter was about the interpretation of Article 63 A 2(b) (disqualification on the ground of defection) of the Constitution and about 10 votes were rejected by the deputy speaker, the chief justice said.