Legal eagles examine pros and cons of knocking court

ISLAMABAD:

After tasting a major setback in parliament on Wednesday, the opposition is seeking to battle it out in the apex court, with the opposition parties’ legal minds already deliberating upon the constitutional grounds of the controversial bills passed.

However, some legal minds express studious reluctance to take the matter to court on the grounds that it would deal a blow to the opposition itself.

“Despite the announcement, I have urged my party to refrain from challenging parliament's act regarding the Electronic Voting Machines (EVM),” a lawmaker belonging to the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), who is also a senior member of the party’s legal, said.

Giving reasons, he feared that if the superior judiciary approved the validity of the laws, the opposition parties would have no other choice left.

“Those who compelled allied parties to attend the joint session might again rescue the PTI government under any circumstances,” he added.

The lawmaker was of the view that instead of knocking the door of the courts, the opposition should raise the issue on the political front by announcing a boycott of the next general elections likely to be held on the basis of the recently passed legislation on EVMs.

He expected that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) would also back the opposition parties on the use of EVMs. “Therefore, the opposition parties should raise the issue before the electoral watchdog so it could not be used in the next general elections.”

JUI-F Senator Kamran Murtaza, who is a legal mind of his party, said that he would go through all the bills passed by the joint session on Wednesday.

Every regime tries to evolve a consensus on legislation regarding electoral reforms. In fact, hundreds of meetings were held by parliamentary committees to evolve a consensus on the Election Reforms Act 2017.

“If certain laws are ultra vires of the Constitution, then the same would be challenged,” he observed.

Murtaza also expressed serious apprehension over the passage of the anti-rape bill, saying that the Standing Committee on Law and Justice had proposed amendments to the bill, but the law ministry decided not to incorporate them.

‘Rules not adhered to’

PPP Senate Farooq H Naek echoed similar caution, saying he would examine all bills before giving legal opinion to his party.

He, however, did point out that the rules and procedures pertaining to the joint session of parliament were not followed. He said the rules stipulate that a majority of total members (442) would be required to pass any bill.

He noted that the government passed bills by 221 votes and one vote was less. On the other hand, the government claims that 228 members voted in the favour of the bills.

Naek was of the view that the entire legislation could be challenged for violating Rule 10 of the parliament joint session 1973, which states that when a bill is passed in a joint sitting, with or without amendment, by the votes of the majority of the total membership of the two houses, an authenticated copy thereof, signed by the speaker, shall be transmitted, by the secretary, to the president for assent under article.

A senior cabinet member believes that the government has withdrawn the electoral reforms bill wherein 37 amendments were proposed and the ECP had expressed reservations in this regard.

At the eleventh hour, the government decided to withdraw the bill, he added.

Regarding the EVMs law, he said that in principle the ECP had no objection to the use of EVMs “if the same are error-free”. Likewise, under the law, EVMs will be procured by ECP itself.

About giving the right to vote to overseas Pakistanis, the member said that the bill has been passed in view of several Supreme Court directions.

It is learnt that Supreme Court Bar Association will challenge ordinances to amendment the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999 in the Supreme Court soon. The SCBA has engaged Salman Akram Raja to plead the case.

Earlier, following the passage of the amendments to the Elections Act, 2017 and multiple other bills, the opposition had announced that it will challenge the move in the Supreme Court.