No-trust motions: Defections bring embarrassment to opposition

SLAMABAD: Massive defections from the opposition parties produced immense embarrassment for them in the shape of shocking defeat of their no-confidence resolution against Senate Sadiq Sanjrani. The rout was not less than a bombshell for the opposition, which failed to maintain unity among its ranks. The result was certainly very distressing it as it lost despite having a clear majority. The authentic numerical tally showed that the opposition parties had 64 senators present while the ruling coalition had 36 MPs.

While the opposition mourned its defeat, jubilation erupted in the ruling coalition over the frustration of the no-confidence motion. The governing alliance focused on the “vote of conscience” by the defectors. Hypocrisy touched its zenith among at least 14 opposition senators, who deserted and ditched their parties and went against them in the ballot.

“The defectors sold their conscience,” leader of the opposition in the National Assembly and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) President Shahbaz Sharif commented after the defeat. Not only all the 64 opposition showed in full public view their support for the no-trust resolution inside the Senate, rising in their seats while backing the motion for grant of leave to move the no-confidence motion, they had also been attending all the combined meetings of the opposition parties over the past few days, avowing their backing to the move.

In the chairman’s election back in March, 2018, the parties which had opposed Sanjrani had also faced nearly a dozen defections, but the deserters were never identified. Similarly, it would now be impossible to pinpoint them because it was a secret ballot. Of the 64 opposition senators, votes of only 50 of them were found valid in support of the resolution. Five ballots declared invalid were also of the opposition MPs.

It is debatable whether these ballots became invalid accidentally or deliberately so that they could not be counted in favour of the no-trust motion. Forty-five senators opposed the no-confidence motion, meaning they backed Sanjrani. Under the rules, the onus was on its sponsors to have at least 53 senators (majority of the total membership (104) of the Senate) vote for its success.

It is immaterial that Sanjrani failed to get majority vote to survive because he was not required to secure it. It was the opposition’s responsibility to present the majority of senators against him in the secret ballot. When Sanjrani was elected chairman in March 2018, he had bagged 57 votes against 46 ballots of his rival Raja Zafarul Haq. Keeping this figure in view, it is evident that Sanjrani now secured 12 votes fewer before while the opposition clinched four ballots more than before.

As predicted, the opposition abstained from the voting on the no-confidence motion of the ruling alliance against Deputy Chairman Saleem Mandviwalla. It was thus bound to fail, and it did as it was supported by just 32 senators. Had it been a secret ballot, the result might have been different. At the end of the day, the top Senate setup which came in place in March 2018 remained intact. Meanwhile, the Rules of Procedure & Conduct of Business in the Senate disallow moving of another no-confidence motion against Senate Chairman Sadiq Sanjrani within six months.

Rule 140 occurring in the chapter “resolutions not mentioned in the Constitution” says when a resolution has been moved, no resolution or amendment raising substantially the same question will be moved within six months from the date of the moving of the earlier motion. When a resolution has been withdrawn with the leave of the Senate, no resolution raising substantially the same question will be moved within four months from the date of the moving of the previous motion.

Rule 149 of the chapter dealing with the “resolutions mentioned in the Constitution” says the provisions of rules 136, 140, 141, 142 and 143 will mutatis mutandis apply to the resolutions under this chapter. Thus, Rule 140 is thus covered. Legal experts opine that since the no-confidence resolution against the Senate chairman is mentioned in the Constitution, Rule 140 has been taken care of, prohibiting moving of a similar motion within six months. They point out that the Senate majority can change any rule through show of hands.