ISLAMABAD: Hours before the late-night vote on the no-confidence resolution against Imran Khan took place in the National Assembly, the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) had on Saturday finalised a draft review petition seeking revision of the April 7 short order of the Supreme Court that had set aside the deputy speaker’s ruling dismissing the no-trust resolution and the subsequent dissolution of the assembly by the president.

The PTI planned to move the review petition before the apex court on Monday.

The review petition has been prepared by the PTI’s legal team consisting of Babar Awan and Azhar Siddique and was to be filed on Saturday, but could not be instituted as the court had closed for the day.

It also seeks a stay against the court’s April 7 directions that require National Assembly Speaker Asad Qaiser to conduct a vote on the joint opposition’s no-trust motion. It pleads that the April 7 short order, in the absence of any detailed reasons, was not a judicial determination in the context of Article 184(3) read with Article 189 of the Constitution.

The PTI has argued that the apex court has erred in appreciating that the no-confidence motion against the prime minister had lapsed due to afflux of time as contained in Article 95(2) of Constitution, and therefore any direction to consider/hear/proceed on it was a direct violation of the stated mandate of the Constitution.

Moreover, all subsequent proceedings of the National Assembly will also be bad in law and the Constitution, the review petition argues, adding the no-confidence proceedings and election for a new prime minister have been elaborately provided in the Constitution. Therefore, the Supreme Court is not entitled to micro-manage the affairs of parliament, the document emphasises.

It also argues that despite an open court announcement of the short order, the Supreme Court has erred by not rendering any decision on the presidential reference moved to seek interpretation of Article 63A of the Constitution that deals with defection, adding that its decision was of paramount importance.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court will resume hearing on the pending presidential reference on Article 63A from Tuesday. Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, a five-judge bench is hearing the reference, which was moved through Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed Khan.

The reference has requested the apex court that the most suitable and appropriate disqualification for a declared defector should be disqualification for life as provided under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution since the constantly recurring defection was a self-feeding menace.

“Such members must never be allowed to return to parliament nor their tainted votes be counted in any constitutional or democratic exercise,” the reference emphasises.

The AGP has already argued before the Supreme Court whereas senior counsel Makhdoom Ali Khan was representing the Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shehbaz Sharif and the PML-N.

The reference has asked “whether keeping in view the scheme and spirit of the Constitution, which enshrines democratic values, customs and norms and provides for a parliamentary form of government conducted through the chosen representatives of the people being carriers of Amanat, which interpretation of Article 63A should be adopted and implemented to achieve the constitutional objective of curbing the menace of defections and purification of the electoral process and democratic accountability”.

“Where a member engages in constitutionally prohibited and morally reprehensible act of defection, can the member nevertheless claim a vested right to have his vote counted and given equal weightage or there exist or was to be read into the constitution a restriction to exclude such tainted votes from the vote count?” it wonders.

Published in Dawn, April 10th, 2022