SC orders Pakistan Tehreek e Insaaf to come to the parliament once again.
SC Advise to PTI:
The National Assembly Speaker’s gradual acceptance of party resignations, which the IHC had deemed acceptable, was being challenged in a suit filed by the PTI before the top court.
The SC adjourned the case indefinitely after expressing worries about the court’s jurisdiction over the subject due to interfering with the speaker’s authority, mirroring the high court’s decision.
It is important to remember that PTI leader Qasim Suri recognised the resignations of 123 PTI MNAs on April 13 while serving as the acting speaker.
These MNAs had responded to their party chairman Imran Khan’s appeal after Khan was ousted as prime minister by a no-confidence vote earlier in the month.
But on April 17, Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, the newly elected NA Speaker, gave the assembly secretariat instructions to handle the PTI MPs’ resignations once more and give them to him so that they could be handled legally.
The 22nd speaker of the assembly’s decision was made in the midst of rumours and accusations that some PTI MPs were prepared to resign and were sending out signals that their resignations should not be recognized.
Later, in June, the ruling coalition developed a plan regarding the issue of PTI lawmakers’ en masse resignation from the National Assembly and decided to move through with phase-wise acceptance.
Around 30 legislators from the former ruling party, according to parliamentary sources, did not want to leave the assembly, and they said they might meet with the NA speaker directly to prevent their resignations from being accepted.
Later, after learning that the lawmakers had not been summoned in a personal capacity before the speaker of the National Assembly, the IHC had labelled the resignations of 123 PTI MNAs as strange.
PTI had then challenged the IHC’s judgement, which declared the acceptance of PTI lawmakers’ resignations as unconstitutional, in the SC.
During the proceedings today, the two-member apex court bench consisting of Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial and Justice Ayesha Malik heard the PTI’s plea against the phased acceptance of resignations.
The IHC’s ruling that the acceptance of PTI legislators’ resignations was illegal was subsequently contested by PTI before the SC.
The PTI’s argument against the resignations being accepted in stages was heard during today’s sessions by the two-member highest court bench, which was made up of Chief Justice Umar Atta Bandial and Justice Ayesha Malik.
The court stated that the people have chosen their representatives for five years; it would be better if the PTI performed its genuine responsibility in the legislature.
It is obviously a very challenging issue for the court to meddle in the speaker’s affairs in this way, the CJ said.
The victims of the floods “have neither water to drink nor bread to eat,” CJ Bandial continued. “Millions of people have been displaced by the floods.”
What would the cost of the 123 by-elections be in light of the country’s economic situation? the judge further urged.
If ballots can be held on the 11 seats that became empty after their resignations were granted, then why not the additional 114, the PTI lawyer Faisal Chaudhry said.
What authority are you speaking of collective defections in when individual members can seek the courts? Justice Malik made a query.
What is this situation’s true purpose? What advantage would PTI receive even if elections were held on all 123 seats, CJ Bandial said.
