Misrepresenting army: SC seeks explanation from PAT, PTI
Court raises questions over use of ‘abusive language’
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought an explanation from the Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) over Parliament’s apprehensions regarding the protesting parties’ misrepresentation of the army’s support for their sit-ins.
Awami National Party and Balochistan National Party counsel Raza Rabbani expressed these apprehensions to the five-judge bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk. In view of his apprehensions, the counsel raised three questions significant to the present political scenario.
The first question asked “whether any political party or any other group could ask constitutional office-bearers to disengage from office under threat of violence or use of force in violation of the Constitution.”
The second question raised was: “Whether any political leader can legitimately involve the Pakistan Army in his design to achieve his unconstitutional objectives by attempting to reassure his followers that army by a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ will determine the future course of his action.”
“Whether a political leader can misrepresent the support of Pakistan Army to their cause in public or private communications, thereby compromising the image of a national institution,” asked the third question.
Responding to these questions, Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk said that despite the issuance of a restraining order directing state functionaries to not take any extra-constitutional steps on August 15, apprehensions in this regard were still present. In light of this, Mulk said the court will keep this matter open.
The court also directed the protesting parties to submit a reply to these questions within three days. PTI’s counsel Yousaf Khosa clarified that the PTI will strongly oppose any extra-constitutional steps taken in the present political scenario.
Meanwhile, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar said that protests play a positive role in making people aware of their right and it is the duty of opposition parties to point out the government’s mistakes. However, Justice Saqib added, protesting parties should not violate the rights of others. He further questioned PML-Q’s counsel as to why his leadership was talking about the imposition of a coup in the country.
Meanwhile, Justice Jawwad S Khawaja raised questions over the use of abusive language by PAT and PTI’s leadership against their opponents. “Politics is the name of compromises but the court will give verdicts in view of the Constitution,” said Justice Jawwad.
Attorney General for Pakistan Salman Aslam Butt informed the bench the government was showing restraint despite attacks on state properties by protesters. The hearing of the case has been adjourned till next week.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 11th, 2014.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought an explanation from the Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) over Parliament’s apprehensions regarding the protesting parties’ misrepresentation of the army’s support for their sit-ins.
Awami National Party and Balochistan National Party counsel Raza Rabbani expressed these apprehensions to the five-judge bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk. In view of his apprehensions, the counsel raised three questions significant to the present political scenario.
The first question asked “whether any political party or any other group could ask constitutional office-bearers to disengage from office under threat of violence or use of force in violation of the Constitution.”
The second question raised was: “Whether any political leader can legitimately involve the Pakistan Army in his design to achieve his unconstitutional objectives by attempting to reassure his followers that army by a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ will determine the future course of his action.”
“Whether a political leader can misrepresent the support of Pakistan Army to their cause in public or private communications, thereby compromising the image of a national institution,” asked the third question.
Responding to these questions, Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk said that despite the issuance of a restraining order directing state functionaries to not take any extra-constitutional steps on August 15, apprehensions in this regard were still present. In light of this, Mulk said the court will keep this matter open.
The court also directed the protesting parties to submit a reply to these questions within three days. PTI’s counsel Yousaf Khosa clarified that the PTI will strongly oppose any extra-constitutional steps taken in the present political scenario.
Meanwhile, Justice Mian Saqib Nisar said that protests play a positive role in making people aware of their right and it is the duty of opposition parties to point out the government’s mistakes. However, Justice Saqib added, protesting parties should not violate the rights of others. He further questioned PML-Q’s counsel as to why his leadership was talking about the imposition of a coup in the country.
Meanwhile, Justice Jawwad S Khawaja raised questions over the use of abusive language by PAT and PTI’s leadership against their opponents. “Politics is the name of compromises but the court will give verdicts in view of the Constitution,” said Justice Jawwad.
Attorney General for Pakistan Salman Aslam Butt informed the bench the government was showing restraint despite attacks on state properties by protesters. The hearing of the case has been adjourned till next week.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 11th, 2014.