Atonement is by admitting guilt & public apology: SC

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday observed that whosoever got decision not in their favour should offer public apology first for dishonesty and malafide intentions and then it can determine whether one can be disqualified for life or not.

A five-member large bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar and comprising Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, was hearing 13 identical pleas, seeking interpretation and determination of time period of disqualification in the available provisions of the Constitution as well as election laws.

Justice Ijazul Ahsen observed that giving mis-declaration by a candidate is in fact mis-statement.

The Chief Justice said that all the political parties retained Article 62(1)(f) when the 18th Amendment was passed.

Sardar Muhammad Aslam, counsel for petitioners Nazir Ahmed Jutt, ex MNA from Vehari and Khan Muhammad Jatoi, however, contended that Parliament did not touch the provision fearing backlash of religious elements.

The CJ asked the learned counsel as to whether he wants to say that Parliament got scared and came under pressure, adding Parliament is supreme.

Sardar Aslam replied that Parliament is not in a position to amend or do away with this provision of law first for lack of two thirds majority. Secondly, at this point of time, Parliament and political parties have an apprehension that they may lose the sympathy of voters and religious institutions and thus are afraid of bringing any change in the said provision.

This is obvious from the incident recently witnessed during the Faizabad sit-in wherein the government totally failed to deal with the situation”, the counsel contended.

He pleaded that the apex court should step in and re-visit the provision of 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.

He submitted that Article 62(1)f) is idealistic and in view of opinion given by Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa in Ishaq Khakwani verses Mian Nawaz Sharif case “we have to see as to how many persons in the country have the traits mentioned.