As the tussle between the Supreme Court and the prime minister approaches breaking point, constitutional experts and lawyers are eager for the rule of law to be established. Senator S M Zafar, a renowned lawyer, termed the situation ‘unusual’ and hoped that Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani would change his attitude.
Zafar said that the PM has the right to appeal against the decision, but he can also seek a stay order. After charges are framed against him at the next hearing, the PM will be given another opportunity to defend himself, but the court can also caution him or imprison him for six months. To avoid such a situation, Senator Zafar said, the PM can submit an unconditional apology to the court at any stage of the trial.
Asked if the PM would be bound to implement the court order on opening cases if elections were announced, Senator Zafar said: “Yes he will have to, otherwise he will be facing the same music.”
Justice (retd) Tariq, meanwhile, said that the language of the charges framed by the court against the PM will be critical, as it will have to be seen whether the language will be in accordance with Clause C or Clause H of Article 63 of the Constitution, which relate to disqualification for membership of Parliament.
Barrister Waseem Sajjad avoided answering some thorny questions on the issue, but he did maintain that the court does not want to punish the PM but just wants the compliance of its order to write a letter. Justice (retd) Wajihud Din Ahmad said that, even if the PM resigns, he will still face trial. Justice Ahmad also said that the president has no total immunity in criminal case under article 248, adding that, if the president unintentionally commits a crime he has immunity, but if the crime is premeditated, the constitution does not afford him immunity from prosecution.
On the right of appeal, Justice (retd) Ahmad said that the PM can file an intra-court appeal against the order, which will be heard by at least a seven-judge bench.
The common impression of lawyers was that both sides have reached the point of no return – a bad omen for the country. Several lawyers were of the view that the Memogate issue has damaged Pakistan’s reputation; the NRO issue has made things worse.
The PM’s lawyer, Aitzaz Ahsan, though, emphasised his earlier stance that the show cause notice issued to the prime minister should be discharged. Speaking to media outside the court, Aitzaz sad that the prime minister acted upon the advice of the law minister and law secretary – which was sent in a written form – and thus, did not commit any contempt of the court. He stressed that he wanted democracy to prevail in the country and the clash of institutions to end.
(Read: Held in contempt)
Published in The Express Tribune, February 3rd, 2012.
COMMENTS (8)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Nothing seems justice from these courts.
@Imran: Its no wonder, since he is a retired judge, a known staunch opponent of PPP and senior member of opposition party. Real pitty is that the serving judiciary is openly playing politics.
PM simply write the letter
This is judicial activism at its worst.
This is a rare example that Mr. Gilani is going to make scarifies for the sake of President and the PPP.
But such action of the SC should also be for the aggrieved common man of the country.
Mr. Justice (retd) Wajihud Din Ahmad, your opinion does not carry any weight after you have indulged yourself in politics.
I live in US, I am fed up with these two faces. Need to get rid of them as ASAP. They are destabilizing by their fixed agenda.