The Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) has contended that the prime minister’s alleged controversial statement in parliament is completely protected under the Constitution.
This he said in a concise statement he submitted to the Supreme Court over maintainability of a petition seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.
In response to the court’s October 23 order, the AGP submitted a reply over Insaf Lawyers Forum Punjab Senior Vice President Gohar Nawaz Sindhu’s appeal for disqualification of the PM Nawaz.
Earlier, Lahore High Court (LHC) had rejected his petition.
The petitioner claimed the premier had first asked army chief General Raheel Sharif to act as a ‘mediator’ between the government and protesting parties – the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) – and to serve as a ‘guarantor’ to any agreement with the parties.
He alleged that the premier later lied in front of parliament and denied making any such request to the army chief and therefore he should be disqualified. “This statement [of the PM] is protected under Articles 66 and 69 of the Constitution. A member of the parliament enjoys complete freedom of speech in respect of anything said in parliament and is not liable to any proceedings in this respect, except Article 68 imperatives,” said the AGP’s reply.
The AGP said Article 66 provides a complete bar from calling into question the proceedings of the parliament.
“..The petitioner requires this Honourable Court to call in question the relevant proceedings of parliament, which are beyond the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court with reference to Article 68 of the Constitution”
He said through the 18th Amendment several amendments were introduced in Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution. “In particular, after the Amendment requirement of Article 62 (1) (f), that the member be sagacious, righteous and non-profligate and honest and ameen, now requires that there should be no declaration to the contrary by any court of law,” he said.
The reply stated that the matter of the post-election disqualification of a member of the parliament falls within the jurisdiction of the Speaker National Assembly or Chairman Senate and the Election Commission.
The reply said the bona fides of the petitioner were apparently lacking. “This is in view of his admitted association with a political party [Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf] whose leader has been a member of parliament and he has been maligning a former chief justice of Pakistan and other members of the judiciary.”
It said that under the circumstances, the LHC had rightly dismissed the petition on this account by two successive orders,” it said.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 1st, 2014.
1714024018-0/ModiLara-(1)1714024018-0-270x192.webp)
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ