ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) of Pakistan on Monday refused to entertain Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) plea regarding the disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif under Article 62-F of the Constitution. However, an appeal was filed challenging this order.
The Express Tribune has learnt that the SC registrar office returned a petition filed by PTI's Ishaq Khan Khakwani after raising four objections.
Filing a petition under Article 184-3 of Constitution, PTI’s attorney Irfan Qadir on September 1 had prayed to the court to disqualify the premier as a member of the shoora since he had given a ‘false statement’ in the National Assembly. The petition explained that the prime minister had asked the Army chief to act as a mediator between government, PTI chairman Imran Khan and Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) chief Dr Tahirul Qadri and serve as guarantor to any agreement. However, this was contrary to facts, the petition argued.
The registrar office, though, objected that none of the fundamental right of the petitioner had been violated, therefore he has no “locus standi” (standing) to file a petition for the disqualification of the prime minister.
“Sitting Prime Minister has been implicated as a party who cannot be implicated as such under Article 248 of the Constitution,” it added.
The SC’s institution branch though recommended that the senior PTI leader can approach the proper forum for redressal of their grievances.
Later on, the petitioner while filing an appeal, challenged the objections raised, saying that registrar has no power to decide as to whether the petition can be entertained or not.
“The SC’s office order runs contrary to plethora of judicial precedents of recent years of the post restoration period of former Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry according to which in similar circumstances petitions were entertained against sitting prime ministers, federal ministers and parliamentarians where many of them were directly disqualified by the Supreme Court itself with further directions to the Election Commission of Pakistan to de-notify those holders of public office,” the appeal stated.
The petitioner also maintained that SC’s institution officer returning the petition, in the absence of any specific rule, has no mandate in law to hold that the petition in question as not entertain-able. Regardless, no rule whatsoever has been quoted in support of the impugned order.
He further contended that the SC’s office order is violative of the principle of ‘Audi AlteramPartem’ (hear the other side too) as the same has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.
“The question of maintainability is to be decided by the Supreme Court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution. In this case, the institution officer has assumed upon himself the functions of the Supreme Court”, the appeal further reads.
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ