Lahore High Court’s Chief Justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti on Tuesday reserved his verdict after the PML-N and PML-Q/ Punjab Assembly secretariat could not reach a consensus on the neutrality of a person, who would be nominated to preside over the House on April 16 already fixed for the election for the chief minister’s position.
The PML-N’s proposal for an early poll was turned down by the lawyers representing the PMLQ and assembly secretariat, maintaining that the contest would be held on April 16.
As this was the second time the matter had come to the LHC, CJ Bhatti gave opportunity to the lawyers representing the parties with direction to come up with a settlement upon when the election for the CM’s slot should be conducted or who would chair the proceedings of the House that day.
However, both opportunities bore no fruit as a result of which CJ Bhatti remarked that this conduct would make a mockery of the country and damage its reputation.
As proceedings commenced on Tuesday, Barrister Ali Zafar, who is representing PML-Q leader and candidate for the chief minister’s post, Punjab Assembly Speaker Parvez Elahi, opposed the petition giving different citations.
He argued that the assembly’s matters could not be challenged in the courts.
He implored that whenever such matters were brought to the courts, they denied them entertaining them.
Also read: LHC orders opening of Punjab deputy speaker’s office
“The courts only entertain mattes related to constitutional violation. But this matter purely falls under procedural issue that does not come under court’s jurisdiction,” he added.
The lawyer cited the recent example of Senate Chairman Sadiq Sanjrani’s election wherein seven votes were rejected and the opposition challenged this matter in court.
However, the court observed that this matter could only be entertained if there was any constitutional violation in it.
“In [National Assembly] deputy speaker Qasim Suri’s matter, the no-trust motion had not been carried within seven days.”
On April 7, the top court had set aside the ruling of the NA deputy speaker to dismiss the opposition’s no-confidence resolution against Prime Minister Imran Khan.
Zafar further contended that the summoning of the House or its adjournment as well as the powers delegated to its speaker or their withdrawal were the business of the assembly that could not be decided by the court.
On a court’s query over the fixing the contest session on April 16, Zafar argued that there was no timeframe given in the rules and procedure of the assembly.
“Only immediate election for the CM’s position, with no other business, has been discussed,” he added.
The court’s asked Zafar as to why the PML-Q and the secretariat had fixed April 16 if immediate election was mentioned in the rules.
The lawyer replied the government had fixed April 3 for the contest but because of an unpleasant incident, the House was adjourned till April 16.
Azam Nazir Tarar, the lawyer representing PML-N leader and opposition leader in the Punjab Assembly Hamza Shehbaz, argued that the province was running without its chief but its government was lingering on the matter on one pretext after another.
As the arguments reached on who will preside the House that on April 16, the lawyers for the PMLQ and assembly secretariat opposed Deputy Speaker Sardar Dost Muhammad Mazari’s name, arguing that he had become controversial after disclosing that a no-trust motion had been submitted against him and gone into litigation in the LHC.
To this, the deputy speaker’s counsel argued that Clause (3) of Article 53 of the Constitution read: “When the office of the Speaker is vacant, or the Speaker is absent or is unable to perform his functions due to any cause, the Deputy Speaker shall act as speaker.”
Responding to the no-trust-motion, he argued that it had just been submitted and was not carried out yet.
Also read: En masse resignations: what’s next?
Advocate General Punjab Ahmad Awais argued that only solution to this debate was to strictly follow the procedure laid out in the Constitution and the assembly’s rules.
On the court’s query, Zafar proposed that the panel of chairmen, comprising of four members from treasury and opposition benches whose name would be on the top, would chair the House.
To this, Hamza’s counsel argued that there was no constitutional bar over presiding over the provincial assembly by Deputy Speaker Mazari, citing the recent example of the National Assembly when Speaker Asad Qaisar and Deputy Speaker Suri chaired the House even through there were no-trust-motions filed against them.
He further contended that when you were not relying upon the deputy speaker, so how it could be believed that the panel of chairmen headed by Mian Shafi, who belonged to the PTI, would preside over the House fairly.
This irked LHC CJ Bhatti who asked: “So what will be the solution then?”
Senator Tarar proposed a suggestion that in the provincial assembly, there were four to five independent candidates, who did not belong to any party. “They could be given the chance for presiding over the House that day.”
However, the PML-Q and secretariat lawyers did not agree to the proposal.
LHC CJ Bhatti asked the lawyers to assist him over “who will preside over the House if no consensus develops among the parties”. To this, the counsel representing the assembly secretariat argued that if the deadlock persisted, the chances of governor rule would increase.
However, after hearing detailed arguments, the court reserved the decision.
PML-N’s Hamza has filed a petition seeking election for the CM’s slot, Deputy Speaker Mazari has approached the court over depriving him from the powers of the acting speaker and the PML-Q’s general secretary has sought the LHC’s assistance in the “recovery of its MPAs held hostage at a local hotel by the PML-N”.
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