Ill-advised dictum

The Speaker's defiance of the Supreme Court's ruling on PTI seats may trigger a political crisis and judicial backlash

Defiance at the cost of national cohesion is at work. The dictum from National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq to the Election Commission to notify the 'Independent' and PTI legislators as Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) members is directly in conflict with the Supreme Court's July 12 judgment. The apex court had recognised PTI as a political party, and had ordered the electoral watchdog to allot it the reserved seats of women and minorities.

The tactic on the part of the legislature and a constitutional organ to defy a mandatory ruling of the superior judiciary is not only tantamount to contempt of court, but also lands the Speaker and the Election Commissioner in violation of rules and precedents. Certainly, it is a political stunt on the part of the ruling coalition as it seems determined to lock horns with the top court, especially after its failure to bulldoze an amendment in the lower house that allegedly pertained to clipping the powers of the judges, and bringing them under the thumb of executive writ.

With 80-odd seats going to the SIC, the strategy is to deny the PTI its rightful mandate by invoking the tailor-made Election (2nd Amendment) Bill 2024. The unison of thought between the Speaker and the ECP that the act applies retrospectively and, thus, 41 seats by virtue of declaration of respective candidates cannot be allocated to the PTI is a bizarre attempt to hold the swindling majority of the beleaguered coalition. It is set to invite the ire of the Supreme Court and put the organs of the state in a renewed quandary.

The coalition government is ill-advised and it is unnecessarily setting a dangerous precedent, wherein the parliament's image is being tainted on the premise of a jaundiced law that is clearly in conflict with the constitutional framework. The arm-twisted decimation of PTI will further the ante, and the opposition parties will rally for more agitations. Many members of the treasury too are likely to be on the fences, irked by this confrontational politics, which is certainly not a service to democracy.