The apex court has said it will interpret the meaning of the terms 'Sadiq’ and ‘Ameen' – and give a standard that will apply to all the candidates contesting elections in the future.
The two-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, on Thursday observed that it would define the terms ‘Sadiq’ and ‘Ameen’ irrespective of the consequences.
“We are not concerned whether one member or half of assembly is disqualified due to the court’s judgment,” Justice Khawaja said, adding that the court’s ruling would be a precedent for upcoming general as well as local government (LG) elections.
He said if the issue remained unresolved then opponent of every contesting candidate would raise allegation against him (the candidate) and it would become difficult to find persons fulfilling requirements of both these terms.
Appearing before the bench, Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Salman Aslam Butt said the matter about interpretation of ‘Sadiq’ and ‘Ameen’ was already sub judice before a larger bench.
The bench also asked the AGP to submit within a week a concise statement regarding maintainability of the three petitions – seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in view of Article 62(f) of the Constitution.
The petitions – filed by Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Ishaq Khan Khakwani and Insaf Lawyers Forum Punjab Senior Vice President Gohar Nawaz Sindhu – contend that the PM should be disqualified as he lied before the assembly.
The petitioners claimed that the premier had first asked army chief General Raheel Sharif to act as a ‘mediator’ between the government and protesting parties – the PTI and Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) – and to serve as a ‘guarantor’ to any agreement and later denied making any such request to the army chief at National Assembly.
Justice Khawaja observed that the court has authority to adjudicate ‘political questions’ but it shows restraint by not giving rulings on such issues. He also asked the AGP that it should be examined as to which forum will decide the disqualification cases of parliamentarians after the passage of the 18th Amendment.
The court also directed all three petitioners to tell the court in writing as to whether they had challenged the PM’s eligibility in individual capacity or as representatives of their parties.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 24th, 2014.
COMMENTS (1)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Should any judge have the right to overturn the will of the people?