MUZAFFARABAD, Dec 14: A constitutional debate is likely to generate in Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) as some constitutional and legal experts have pointed out that since there does not exist any cabinet in AJK, the prime minister cannot exercise his executive authority in the light of the interim constitution.

In support of their standpoint, these experts refer to the Section 12 of the AJK’s interim constitution, which reads: “Subject to this Act, the executive authority of Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall be exercised in the name of the president by the government, consisting of the prime minister and ministers, which shall act through the prime minister who shall be the chief executive of Azad Jammu and Kashmir.”

“The constitution clearly defines the government that it consists of prime minister and ministers. Without the council of ministers (cabinet), the prime minister cannot exercise the executive authority of the government,” said Chaudhry Mohammad Ibrahim Zia, vice-chairman of the AJK Bar Council, in response to a query by Dawn.

It may be recalled here that Prime Minister Sardar Attique Ahmed Khan had dissolved his cabinet on Thursday, and though he came up with a fresh one within five hours, it has not yet taken oath ostensibly due to the ongoing political crisis in AJK.

Mr Zia was of the view that only in the event of dissolution of assembly, the prime minister could continue without ministers till his successor entered upon this office.“Otherwise, he (PM) will have to work in accordance with the spirit of the constitution,” he said, adding the system could face a blow “if the attitude of overlooking the provisions of constitution continued unchecked.”

Former AJK minister Khawaja Farooq Ahmed also subscribed to the views of Mr Zia, recalling that a similar situation had arisen during the People’s Party government after the then prime minister Barrister Sultan Mahmood had dissolved his cabinet under pressure from the military authorities on January 17, 2000.

“In view of the very constitutional requirement, the (then) prime minister had to appoint at least one minister shortly after dissolution of the cabinet,” said Mr Ahmed, himself a lawyer.

He recalled that the then opposition (since ruling party) had raised hue and cry that without the cabinet there did not exist any government.

However, when contacted by this correspondent, senior pro-Muslim Conference lawyer, Raja Hanif Khan, maintained that since there was an elected chief executive in AJK, he could exercise the executive authority of the government in the name of the president without a cabinet.

He referred to what he claimed similar situations in Pakistan as well as in India in the past, and said the superior courts of the two countries had many a times interpreted a similar provision in their respective constitutions which allowed the elected chief executives to exercise the powers of the government in the name of the president/governors.

According to him, some provisions in the constitutions were mandatory and some directory, and AJK interim constitution’s section 12 was of directory nature because no penalty had been provided.

Referring to sub-section 2 of Section 12 which reads “in the performance of his functions under this Act, the prime minister may act either directly or through the ministers,” Mr Khan said the executive authority of the government was not subordinate to the (appointment of) ministers.