PM’s disqualification case: SC to resume hearing on Tuesday

A seven judge larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk will hear four different pleas

ISLAMABAD: A larger bench of the Supreme Court will on Tuesday resume hearing a petition filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), among others, seeking the disqualification of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif

The seven judge larger bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Nasirul Mulk will hear four different pleas, filed by PTI leader Ishaq Khan Khakwani, PML-Q chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, Insaaf Lawyers wing Gohar Nawaz Sindhu and Muhammad Azhar Siddiqui.

The petitioners claim that PM Nawaz had asked Army Chief General Raheel Sharif to act as a ‘mediator’ between the government and protesting parties – PTI and Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) – and serve as a ‘guarantor’ to any agreement with the parties.

They alleged that the premier had later lied in front of the Parliament and denied making any such request, and should therefore be disqualified in view of Article 63 of the Constitution.

Advocate Irfan Qadir is representing PTI, as well as PML-Q leaders in the case.

The larger bench is also expected to give a ruling on the questions raised by a three-judge bench headed by Justice Jawwad S Khawaja in its four-page written order in Sindhu’s appeal against the Lahore High Court’s September 2 order to reject the petition.

The top court has already issued notices to PTI vice president Hamid Khan, Pakistan Peoples Party’s Senator Raza Rabbani, and senior counsel Khawaja Haris to assist the court as amicus curaie (friends of the court) in this matter.

The bench had formulated a number of questions for consideration, with an emphasis to lay down a law suggesting the minimum threshold for attracting Articles 62(1 f) and 63(1 g) of the Constitution, requiring a conviction by a court against a member of Parliament.

The court wants to determine which court is competent to convict a parliamentarian, and what is the standard of proof required for such a conviction.

The court also wants the larger bench to interpret the terms “Sadiq” and “Ameen” as the people should know whether the leaders they choose fulfill the eligibility criteria and qualifications given in Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution to become a member of Parliament.

The larger bench will also consider whether Article 66 (privileges of members) provides an absolute or a qualified privilege to parliamentarians for statements made on the floor of the two houses of Parliament and provincial assemblies, as well as whether the provisions of Articles 62 and 63 override Article 66.

The court has also asked the larger bench to discuss the effect of the 18^th Amendment on Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution.

Further, it said it was necessary for courts, returning officers and election tribunals to receive guidelines for the same reason. Otherwise, there is a likelihood of a lack of uniformity in the decisions made by different courts, returning officers and election tribunals — bearing in mind that there are a total of 1,070 constituencies, and an average of 10 candidates will be contesting elections and will be submitting their nomination papers for scrutiny.