CJP says no-confidence motion cannot be rejected

 Pakistan's Chief Justice Justice Umar Ata Bandial on Monday said that even if the speaker of the National Assembly cited Article 5 of the Constitution, the motion of no confidence would be rejected.

A larger bench of five members of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Bandial and Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Aijazul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel resumed hearing a case filed by the opposition party the previous day when Imran Khan, whom we call "unconstitutional." As a result, CJP has taken suo moto notice of this situation.

PTI Advocate, Babar Awan, in his interview, said he wanted to review the decision of the Supreme Court on March 21, 2022. The Supreme Court did not consider PTI partners in this regard.

Babar Awan said the presidential referendum should be heard with the current announcement of the suo motu.

"Record my request, Imran Khan has allowed me to speak before the court that we are ready to hold elections."

Upon hearing that, Justice Bandial told him to "not talk politics in front of the judges."

Justice Bandial is adamant in his written decision to have his fellow judges approach him and express concern about the constitutional issue facing the country.

During the hearing, PPP MP Farooq H Naek referred to Article 54 (3) and said that a meeting of the National Assembly should be held within 14 days of the submission of the motion.

"The motion of no confidence was filed on March 8, 2022, and the meeting was convened on March 25 instead of March 21. The Deputy Speaker of the NA adjourned the meeting on March 25 after Fateha until March 28," Naek said.

The speaker did not give a reason for not calling the meeting until March 20 after the submission of the proposal, he added.

In this case, Justice Mandokhel denied that Naek's case was related to the Speaker's actions at Sunday's NA meeting.

"Tell me if the Speaker was right or wrong," the judge asked Naek.

"If there are 100 MPs, 50 oppose them and only 25 support them. Won't this proposal be rejected if the majority opposes it?" Asks Justice Akhtar.

Naek said if the majority said we could not be introduced that would not happen. He added that it was the House that approved the motion, not the Speaker.

Justice Akhtar replied that if the government has a majority in the NA, and if it votes against the proposal, no proposal will ever be moved.

"Does the Speaker have the power to dissuade you? What if the speaker does not approve of the move?" he asks.

'No-trust action is not allowed until leave'

Meanwhile, Justice Ahsan noted that "a motion of no confidence is invalid until the leave of the speaker is not granted."

Responding to the remarks, Naek said the Speaker had approved the tabling of the no-confidence motion.

CJP Bandial asked what it means to grant leave and asked who was willing to present the decision - the speaker of the House.

In this regard, Naek responded that the House allows for the tabling of a decision on behalf of the Speaker.

"Does the Speaker have the authority not to allow the decision to be passed and what happens if the speaker does not allow it?" asked Justice Akhtar.

He added that it was in Parliament that the speaker could overturn the decision.

Meanwhile, the CJP Bandial asked if April 3 could not have a debate on the no-confidence motion, so "how can a definite voting date be set without holding a debate on a no-confidence motion?"

He added that a three-day debate should take place on the issue before a referendum could be held.

In this case, Naek informed the court that the Speaker did not allow a debate on the proposal despite the request of PPP chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari.

'Not allowing debate to be a process error'

"Not allowing the debate is part of the process," Judge Ahsan told Naek.

In this case, Naek responded that it was not a procedural error. When asked by the court if it was a constitutional violation, Naek responded in unison.

Naek argued that the speaker had no authority to consider the motion of no confidence in him.

Commenting on Sunday's meeting, the court asked what speaker the speaker had outlined when withdrawing the motion.

Naek told the court that the Speaker had made decisions under Rule 28.

In this case, Judge Akhtar noted that only a speaker can give and reverse a decision under Naek's rule.

"The Speaker may make a decision in his or her office or office," the judge said.

He further added that the speaker authorized the deputy speaker in writing but that he could only preside over the Assembly.

During the hearing, CJP Bandial ordered Naek to challenge the deputy speaker's decision.

The Chief Justice asked how the Speaker could rule on whether the motion was valid or not. "Does the Speaker not have the authority to reject a motion of no confidence?" he asks.

"Even if the Speaker quotes Article 5 of the Constitution, the request for confidence will not be rejected," the CJP said.

The CJP then asked us how secure the speaker is constitutionally protected under Article 69? "We want to make a decision sooner than you do," he said.

Naek said the president had appointed Imran Khan as acting prime minister until a new government was formed, with the head of justice saying that a decision had to be made before the new government was formed.

Naek asked the court to wrap up the case and reserve a decision today.

However, the CJP noted that the court should also hear other respondents. Following this, the court adjourned the case to 12 noon tomorrow.

SC takes notice of suo motu

"Any orders and actions by the Prime Minister Imran Khan and President Arif Alvi regarding the dissolution of the National Assembly will be subject to this court order," CJP Bandial said in a statement on Sunday.

Earlier, the SC barred state institutions from taking any unconstitutional action and ordered them to act by the Constitution, without asking all the country's political forces to remain peaceful.

Sunday's hearing was attended by Pakistani Attorney General Khalid Javed Khan, Supreme Court Bar Association President Ahsan Bhoon and other advisers representing various parties reports The News.

During the hearing on Sunday evening, the CJP issued notices to Pakistani Attorney General Khalid Javed Khan and the Secretary of State for Defense and instructed him and the Secretary of the Interior to submit a report on the state of law and order. before you today. The Supreme Court also ordered all political parties involved in the National Assembly's distrust and other political parties to respond to the case and ordered them to uphold the rule of law and maintain public order and order.

A notice issued to the AGP stated the constitutionality of the Deputy Speaker's decision to reject the no-confidence motion based on Article 5 of the Constitution.

Similarly, the court also issued a notice to the Supreme Court of Attorneys and the Pakistan Bar Association to assist the Court in these suo moto proceedings and the Constitutional complaints lodged under Section 184 (3). The court ruled that the Attorney General of Pakistan was also notified under Order XXVIIA CPC in these matters.

Application by opponents

The joint opposition party also prepared an appeal for the decision of the deputy speaker when the National Assembly adjourned indefinitely as Suri withdrew his vote on a no-confidence motion, calling it "unconstitutional".

According to a petition prepared by the joint opposition party, the speaker should be directed to convene a session today because "the Deputy Speaker cannot adjourn the meeting because it is unconstitutional."

In addition, the opposition party has filed a motion to challenge President Arif Alvi, Prime Minister Imran Khan, Speaker NA Asad Qaiser, and Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri for violating the Constitution.

SCBA application

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) has also filed an application with the Supreme Court over a constitutional issue.

The constitutional petition filed by the SCBA calls for a vote of no confidence, and the speaker cannot cancel voting by decision.

It was also noted that the decision of the deputy speaker conflicts with Section 95 (2). He further added that in terms of Section 58 (1) the prime minister could not even “advise the dissolution of the assembly,” based on a motion of no confidence.

Sources said the special bench of the high court would hear the case.

Procedures of the Punjab Conference

During the hearing on Sunday, Advocate Azam Nazeer Tarar said the continuation of the Punjab Provincial Council was due to be held on Sunday to elect a new Punjab Minister but was postponed until the next Deputy Speaker of the Punjab Assembly. for any reason or cause.

The court ordered that a notice under Order XXVIIA CPC be issued to Advocate General Punjab to assess the effect of the decision of the deputy speaker of the Punjab Council and the circumstances arising out of it.

The court ruled that all political parties involved in the election of a new minister should exercise self-control and maintain public order and order.