The Supreme Court on Saturday directed that Hamza Shehbaz would remain as a ‘trustee’ chief minister of Punjab by July twenty-five (Monday) — following the date of hearing —
Supreme Court Order
when the attorney representing the deputy speaker of the provincial assembly couldn’t satisfy the bench over the latter’s ruling whereby ten PML-Q MPAs’ votes were rejected in a very recount for the election of the province’s prime slot command on a day earlier.
The court additionally directed that Hamza would neither use his powers for political gain nor take major initiatives or choices till then.
A three-judge bench, comprising justice of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, and Justice Munib Akhter, was hearing a plea at the Supreme Court’s Lahore registry filed by PML-Q leader and Punjab Assembly Speaker Chaudhry Parvez Elahi —
Who was additionally the opposite candidate for the CM slot – challenged Deputy Speaker Sardar Dost Muhammad Mazari’s ruling whereby he had rejected ten votes of PML-Q members relying upon the ruling of the SC that said that the votes of these lawmakers, who denied following the party’s directions, wouldn’t be counted.
The proceedings turned around completely different points together with the main one whereby CJP Bandial asked Mazari’s counsel Irfan Qadir to read the precise part of the SC verdict following that the deputy speaker gave his ruling and rejected the votes.
However, Mazari’s counsel couldn’t satisfy the court over its queries.
In proceedings within the morning, Elahi’s counsel attorney Ali Zafar argued that the ruling of the Punjab Assembly deputy speaker was a sheer violation of the Constitution.
He argued that the deputy speaker’s interpretation of the SC ruling, relying upon that the ten votes were rejected, wasn’t solely incorrect but additionally contrary to its real essence.
Zafar contended that the members may solely solid their votes following the directions of the parliamentary party following the Supreme Court’s call however the deputy speaker ruined the real essence of that ruling.
He told the court that the election for the chief minister’s post prevailed on July 22, under the auspices of the Supreme Court’s judgment within which 2 candidates participated.
He acknowledged that Elahi had secured 186 votes out of those 176 votes belonged to the PTI and ten votes belonged to PML-Q. Whereas Hamza Shehbaz of the PML-N gained 179 votes.
Zafar claimed that under Article 130(3) of the Constitution, Elahi was the constitutionally no appointive chief minister.
However, the deputy speaker, with malaise intention, rather than declaring him as the chief minister, passed a ruling by speech that the votes of the ten PML-Q leaders couldn’t be counted and relied on the decision of the Supreme Court.
The attorney noted that Article 63-A of the Constitution was in 2 components.
The first half states that if a parliamentary party decides that its members are to give their vote in favor of a specific candidate for the chief minister and also the members violate that direction, then they’ll be disqualified under Article 63-A. For the method of disqualification, the implementation should be distributed by the party head.
Similarly, the judgment of the Supreme Court passed within the presidential reference additionally confirms that Article 63-A becomes applicable only the parliamentary party makes a choice and also the member refuses to follow it about voting for the chief minister.
The attorney argued that obscurity in Article 63-A or the judgment of the Supreme Court passed within the presidential reference it was mentioned that the directions can be given by the party head rather than the parliamentary party.
The bench summoned Mazari face to face at 2 pm to listen to his purpose of reading over his ruling. The bench additionally directed the deputy speaker to come back up with the election record of the Punjab Assembly.
The court additionally issued notices to Punjab Chief Minister Hamza and also the Chief Secretary. The bench additionally summoned the attorney general for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and advocate general Punjab for legal help.
As the proceedings adjourned 2 pm, the court was jam-packed. The CJP was directed to carry proceedings in a very separate court wherever solely lawyers would be allowed.
However, the lawyers, PTI lawmakers, and media personnel watched the proceedings in different courtrooms on LED screens.
As the bench asked regarding the deputy speaker, his counsel replied that he couldn’t create it due to the charged crowd, thus he was representing him in court.
He additionally told the court that he could represent his client. The judges stood up to carry proceedings in a very separate court.
As the proceedings commenced once again, the bench asked the deputy speaker’s counsel that however would he defend his client’s ruling. Advocate Qadir responded that they were wishing on the Supreme Court’s call where it was directed that the vote of dissident lawmakers wouldn’t be counted.
CJP Bandial asked the counsel to suggest the part of the Supreme Court’s ruling relying upon that the deputy speaker had rejected the votes.
Qadir replied that he had studied the case for 2 hours solely as he was new to the matter.
Read More: Deputy Speaker ruling Hamza retains Punjab CM
The CJP remarked that the bench was additionally 2 hours previous and needed him to read the order.
Advocate Qadir argued that the deputy speaker deemed it applicable to reject the votes following the decision of the Supreme Court and he did this.
Justice Ahsan remarked that the court had aforementioned that the vote of a leader if it went against the parliamentary party’s directions, wouldn’t be counted.
In response, Qadir aforementioned the deputy speaker believed that solely the party’s head leads the parliamentary party. Justice Ahsan remarked what the results would be if the deputy speaker’s understanding of the SC finding was faulty.
The CJP asked regarding the assembly record. Qadir replied that he was unaware of whether or not it had been delivered to the court.
“What precisely does one wish to look at from the record?” the counsel asked the CJP. The CJP told him that bench needed to envision the letter that the deputy speaker was holding whereas giving his ruling.
The CJP remarked that clear it appeared that the deputy speaker had passed the ruling against the Supreme Court’s call. The court additionally directed the Punjab government to submit its elaborated reply.
The CJP additionally noted that the country was passing through an important part thus all the parties ought to step forward to resolve the problems.
The bench adjourned the proceedings until July 25(Monday) with the directions that the following hearing would be command in the capital of Pakistan.
PTI lawmakers together with Shah Mahmood Qureshi, Asad Umar, Mian Mehmood ur Rasheed, Mian Aslam Iqbal, and Sibtain Khan were present on the occasion.
Outside the court premises, PTI supporters gathered and musical slogans in favor of Imran.
They demanded justice from the Supreme Court.
