Punjab CM election: LHC to run day-to-day proceedings

The Lahore High Court’s larger bench fixed May 31 for the completion of arguments by PTI’s counsel upon alleged unconstitutional procedure adopted in administering the oath to newly-elected Punjab Chief Minister Hamza Shehbaz.

The bench headed by Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan expressed its viewpoint to run day-to-day proceedings from the next date to wrap up the case.

The bench was hearing three intra court appeals against LHC’s three orders – one against the decision of LHC Justice Jawad Hassan who had directed the National Assembly speaker to administer the oath to newly-elect CM Hamza – two against Chief Justice Lahore High Court Muhammad Ameer Bhatti’s decisions wherein he had first ordered the President of Pakistan to nominate anyone to administer the oath to Hamza and secondly, he had advised the Punjab governor to ensure administration of the oath.

Read more: LHC issues notice to Hamza, others on petitions challenging his position as CM

As the proceedings commenced, the arguments of PTI’s counsel Imtiaz Rasheed Siddiqi revolved around different points including the silence of the Constitution over the process of summoning the person who becomes chief minister by securing the majority of the vote in the assembly in response to the “resignation” tendered by the previous one.

The Constitution is very clear to the extent of summoning to that person by the governor who reaches in the assembly after contesting the general election and after completion of due process on speaker or the deputy speaker’s contest he is elected upon chief minister’s slot with the majority of votes in the assembly, he argued.

He implored the court that the orders passed by the LHC’s chief justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti and Justice Jawad Hassan were not constitutional orders.

Justice Sadaqat asked if the Constitution is silent then the specific clauses enshrined in the constitution relating to how a CM is elected will not be active.

The counsel Siddiqi reiterated that the constitution is quite silent. He argued that the governor was not given sufficient time to work and wrap up the constitutional crises although he was working on it but the LHC did not deem it appropriate to hear his version.

"You are defending the governor in most arguments rather than the appellants. Your question is that the election held in the Punjab Assembly on April 16 is unconstitutional," Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan asked.

The counsel argued that this is not his case, adding that the LHC overreached its power by deputing the National Assembly speaker for administering the oath to Hamza.

“My right of due process was deprived by the LHC”, the counsel argued. On this, Justice Shahid Jamil asked if the president of Pakistan had been advised and the word directed has not been used in order then what would you say the president should not be expected to give honour to the court’s order.

As the counsel used the word “manmaani” for bench, Justice Shahid Jamil warned him for using appropriate words for the bench.

However, the counsel argued that his case relates to the delay but not to denial. The governor was facing this situation first time as neither there was the chief minister nor his cabinet so he sought assistance from the President of Pakistan but it was portrayed perhaps the governor rejected this matter.

He implored the court that the LHC’s orders in a way usurped the powers of the governor and directed the administration of the oath.

Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh, in response to the counsel’s argument, said that the LHC could not direct the NA speaker for the administration of the oath.

He asked the counsel to whom the court could direct if the National Assembly speaker was not appropriate for the purpose. On this, the counsel replied: Senate chairman.

However, the bench fixed the next date with the direction to run day-to-day proceedings by the next date to conclude the case. Other appellants’ counsels and the law officers will argue on the next date.