SC admits ‘security’ is a serious concern

Top court issues notices to all political parties over constitutional petition seeking polls on same date

ISLAMABAD:

Despite giving the impression that it sticks to its April 4 order for holding election for the Punjab Assembly on May 14, the Supreme Court has realised that security is a serious concern.

On Monday, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief and the Director General Military Operation (DGMO) met with Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and other two apex court judges who are hearing a case related to holding polls in Punjab on May 14.

Sources revealed to The Express Tribune that in the meeting, the ISI chief and the DGMO had informed the judges why it would not be possible for the army troops to provide security at Punjab Assembly elections.

CJP Bandial on Wednesday said the intelligence officials had given the court a complete picture about the engagement of the army personnel to deal with terrorism.

However, instead of accepting the pleas of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and the defence ministry for recalling its April 4 order, the three-judge bench, has taken a different route by issuing notices to all majority political parties over a constitutional petition for holding elections of all provincial and the National Assemblies on the same date.

The petition, filed by Sardar Kashif Khan who is a permanent citizen of Abbottabad, has engaged Shah Khawar as his counsel.

Interestingly, the petition was filed by this 'citizen' on Tuesday evening and the same was listed for hearing on Wednesday.

The counsel for petitioner said there is need for political dialogue for ending the impasse on the issue of holding general elections for the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) assemblies.

"Whereas the court vide its judgment dated 04.04.2023 had directed the general elections to Punjab Provincial Assembly to be held on 14.05.2023, there is resistance to compliance with the said direction by the ECP, the federal government and the ministry of defence."

The bench in its order appreciated the initiative taken by the petitioner to propose the initiation of a political dialogue as a means for setting a practical and feasible date for holding general elections that satisfy the requirement of Article 218(3) of the Constitution.

If the present proceeding is the outcome of the in-camera briefing by spymasters then both the coalition government and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) will agree on a date for holding all elections. Both sides may show willingness for dialogue today (Thursday).

It is witnessed that the bench has given mixed signals by not entertaining defence ministry's and the ECP's contentions as well as giving observations on the implications of the government's failure to approve supplementary budget of Rs21 billion for elections from the parliament.

That has also given hope to the PTI that the present government will face tough times in the court. Shah Mahmood Qureshi and Chaudhry Fawad Hussain will represent the PTI before the bench. The PTI wants to end harassment of its workers and supporters.

A dialogue cannot be successful until the superior judiciary does not compel the PTI to do so. Likewise powerful circles should also urge the coalition government to show willingness to reach a political settlement.

Presently, the government and the establishment want general elections in the month of October. However, the PTI and the CJP want elections before the end of the incumbent government term in September.

During the hearing, Justice Ijazul Ahsan said that both sides should show bonafide intentions in the dialogue.

The ongoing judicial politics is also linked with national politics. One section of judges within the SC is facing a tough time. It is debatable whether the division in the SC will also diminish if political stakeholders come to an agreement  regarding polls.

Barrister Zafarullah, the counsel for the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), said  no legal question can be raised on the legitimacy of the government after the defeat of its finance bill in the parliament.

Another lawyer said Pakistan has a written Constitution and "conventions here do not have the status of the Constitution like the United Kingdom".

During Wednesday’s hearing, it appeared that all stakeholders want to get a face-saving without giving an impression that they are backtracking from their position.

PML-N Lawyer Barrister Zafarullah said that no legal question could be raised on the legitimacy of the government after the defeat of its finance bill in parliament.

Another lawyer said that Pakistan had a written Constitution, unlike the UK, and “we do not have conventions having any status of the Constitution”.