Supreme Court forms larger bench to hear presidential reference

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has constituted a larger bench to hear a presidential reference as well as a petition of the Supreme Court Bar Association for restraining political parties from holding public meetings in Islamabad before voting on a no-confidence motion against the prime minister.

A five-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umer Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsen, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel will conduct hearing on both the matters on March 24. The hearing on the presidential reference will be of much importance as the SC judgment regarding lifetime disqualification is in fieled, authored by Justice Umer Ata Bandial in 2018.

The president has referred to an apex court judgment, authored by Justice Shafiur Rehman in the case of Khawaja Ahmad Tariq Rahim vs Federation of Pakistan, PLD 1992 SC 646, holding that on account of cancerous vice of floor crossing, Pakistan has been unable to achieve stability in the polity of the country. The reference has asked what other measures and steps can be undertaken within the existing constitutional and legal framework to deter the cancerous practice of defection, floor crossing and vote buying?

The reference stated that a robust interpretation of Articles 62 and 63A of the Constitution by the court at this critical juncture would not only salvage the representative institutions but also the democratic process and restore the faith of people in democracy.

It is interesting to note that in the case of Samiullah Baloch vs Abdul Karim Nausherwani 2018 PLD SC 405, the judgment authored by Justice Umer Ata Bandial had held that the incapacity created for failing to meet the qualifications under Article 62(1) (f) of the Constitution imposes a permanent bar which remains in effect so long as the declaratory judgment supporting the conclusion of one of the delinquent kinds of conduct under Article 62(1) (f) of the Constitution remains in effect.

The majority judgment 4-1 with Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh not agreeing with reasoning had been delivered on petitions in the fake degrees case. The judicial mechanism in Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution grants a fair opportunity and adequate remedy for relief to a candidate under challenge to vindicate himself, the judgment had held.

“As a result, we are inclined to hold that the incapacity created for failing to meet qualifications under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution imposes a permanent bar which remains in effect so long as the declaratory judgment supporting the conclusion of one of the delinquent kinds of conduct under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution remains in effect,” the judgment had held.