Supreme Court Verdict – Help me understand!
I need your help in understand Supreme Court’s verdict on no confidence movement recently. Intention is just better understanding, not to question the verdict itself.
I need your help in understand Supreme Court’s verdict on no confidence movement recently. Intention is just better understanding, not to question the verdict itself.
On April 03, 2022, Pakistan Supreme Court felt the need to take a Sou moto notice on the on-going political activities and certain actions in the National Assembly.
If I correctly understood the objective/mandate the Supreme Court set for itself was (https://www.dawn.com/news/1683235):
- First and most important – “We would also like to examine whether such an action (dismissal of the no-trust motion on the basis of Article 5) is protected by the ouster (removal from the court’s jurisdiction) contained in Article 69 of the Constitution”
- Also, important but applicable only if the first one justified – “on the constitutionality of the [deputy speaker’s] decision” to dismiss the no-trust motion on the basis of Article 5 of the Constitution
- Also, important but again only if the above two are justified – “it is contended that, prima facie, there is neither a finding recorded in the matter nor was a hearing granted to the affected party”
- Another important comment that this is all an “important matter”.
I request my readers to please help me fill up the gaps in above if I missed anything above.
On April 07, 2022 (in only 4 days on this extremely important matter) Supreme Court issued a verdict on the “above sou moto” notice.
I am a law-abiding citizen and do not in any way intend to question the verdict and I am sure my lake of understanding is due to my own short comings and lake of knowledge, however, I read court’s verdict several times, and I also read the Constitution of Pakistan multiple times, but I am still scratching my head and trying to see:
- How to relate the verdict to the objective/mandate of the sou moto notice
- And who actually violated the constitution and how
Naïve me, I am just trying to find answers to the following basic questions:
- Where does the verdict justify the first and most important question of its own eligibility to interfere in parliamentary affairs? Alternatively on what basis did SC qualified itself to be able to take this sou moto notice on parliamentary matters.
Imagine, if the SC is not qualified to interfere in parliamentary matters, we can ignore everything else as there is no case.
Please read Article 69 of the constitution. It says:
Article 69
Courts not to inquire into proceedings of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament).
(1) The validity of any proceedings in [Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] shall not be called in question on the ground of any irregularity of procedure.
(2) No officer or member of [Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] in whom powers are vested by or under the Constitution for regulating procedure or the conduct of business, or for maintaining order in [Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)], shall be subject to the jurisdiction of any court in respect of the exercise by him of those powers.
(3) In this Article, [Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] has the same meaning as in Article 66.
Now please read the verdict again and help me understand how does the verdict tells me how did SC qualified itself to interfere?
- Where does the verdict justify how Article 5 of constitution was violated and on what basis was the speaker’s (deputy speaker’s) ruling considered illegal?
Ideally if question number 1 above cannot be justified the rest of discussion is immaterial but for the sake of discussion, lets ignore the above question and assume the honorable Supreme Court “was” qualified to interfere, I was trying to see how the verdict justified violation of article 5 of the constitution?
Please read Article 5 of the Constitution. It says:
Article 5
Loyalty to State and obedience to Constitution and law.
(1) Loyalty to the State is the basic duty of every citizen.
(2) Obedience to the Constitution and law is the obligation of every citizen wherever he may be and of every other person for the time being within Pakistan
Now please read the verdict again and explain to me how does the verdict describes on what basis was the speaker’s ruling unconstitutional?
- Was the ruling not within his/her authority?
- Was the “reason used to reject no confidence move” illegal?
- If the reason used to reject the no confidence move was considered illegal, how did the honorable court determined the same without knowing any details about the reason?
- How was it determined that once a no confidence move gets approved it cannot be rejected?
Neither I am a lawyer nor claim to be a constitutional expert, but I can read and understand English well and can think and analyze things logically. Also, I am not “well connected” and my source of information is “The Constitution of Pakistan” and “written” materials published in reputed newspapers.
Can you please help?
Note: If you like what you just read you can help more by:
- Subscribing – this way you will be notified anytime a new post gets made
- Sharing posts – this way you will spread the good words to more people
- Sharing ideas – this way you can give us your ideas/solutions for new blog
- Writing blog – this way you can actually contribute to this website and participate in the good work
Feel free to reach out to us for any questions, suggestions and/or areas for improvements.
Babar Saeed
April 18, 2022
The writer is a professional marketer and engineer with good work exposure to governments, and businesses and industries in the private sector in several countries. Idea is to take the first step in adding value to anything that one gets exposed to instead of just complaining about the same.