National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq has clarified that his comments from a TV interview were misquoted in English daily, reaffirming his respect for courts.

“A newspaper misquoted remarks made in an interview. The court writes to the Election Commission of Pakistan and we implement it,” he said while presiding over an NA session on Monday.

His clarification came after an interview with a private news channel where he spoke about parliamentary matters and the Supreme Court decisions.

But a newspaper quoted him as saying that he would not act on the SC’s decision in the matter of the reserved seats allocated to PTI and he would prefer to wait for the Election Commission of Pakistan’s decision before taking action.

Sadiq allegedly referred to the Supreme Court majority decision on the matter of PTI’s reserved seats as a “re-writing of the Constitution”—a view shared by many ministers.

“I have huge respect for the honourable judiciary,” Sadiq told lawmakers and added that the newspaper should do “responsible reporting.”

In July, a full-court bench of the Supreme Court set aside orders of the Peshawar High Court and ECP taking away reserved seats from the Sunni Ittehad Council. The court ruled that the PTI should be considered a political party and given reserved seats.

The ECP sought guidance from the SC on the statement that in absence of a valid organizational structure of PTI, who would confirm the political affiliation of the returned candidates (MNAs and MPAs) on behalf of PTI, who have filed their statements in light of the SC’s July 12 order.

In a clarification on September 14, the SC disposed of the ECP’s petition and stated that the electoral authority’s request for clarification “is merely a delaying tactic.” The apex court noted that the ECP’s failure to perform the SC order might have consequences.

Then in its detailed order, the apex court said that election authorities denying major political party recognition infringes upon the electorate’s rights.

Earlier this month, the SC issued another clarification and said that amendments to election laws cannot overturn the Supreme Court’s ruling in the reserved seats case. In its 14-page dissenting note, CJP Isa said that the majority of eight judges decided to part ways with the court, comprising thirteen judges, which had heard the appeals.

But former CJP Qazi Faez Isa’s dissenting note said that the majority ruling in the case was not binding.