ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday annulled its 2022 verdict on the interpretation of Article 63(A) of the Constitution, which barred lawmakers from going against party directions when voting in parliament.
Hearing the Supreme Court Bar Association’s (SCBA) plea, the five-member bench led by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa announced the unanimous verdict and approved the review petition with the top judge saying that the detailed verdict will be issued later.
The case revolves around the apex court’s previous ruling, which stated that the votes of parliamentarians who deviated from their party’s directives and policies were to be disregarded and not counted.
During the hearing today, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar apprised the court that he met the PTI founder, however, the meeting didn’t have the attorney-client privilege as it was also attended by police officers.
The lawyer further said that the incarcerated ex-prime minister has requested to appear before the court himself and that he wishes to raise certain arguments via virtual appearance.
Reiterating the party’s earlier opposition to the bench, he said that the PTI founder has maintained that the five-member bench hearing the said case wasn’t constituted properly so they won’t be a part of the proceedings.
“If you announce a verdict then there would be a conflict of interest […] the PTI founder said that the bench is not legal and so there is no point of moving forward,” he remarked, adding that the PTI wanted to distance itself from the court proceedings. “I will not appear before the court if the PTI founder is not given permission [to present his arguments],” he noted.
However, the lawyer’s repeated mention of Khan didn’t sit well with the CJP who said: “Why are you taking [Imran] Khan’s name again and again, [you should] talk without taking [any] names.”
Furthermore, the top judge also warned the counsel of contempt of court proceedings on his remarks regarding a perception that the court will allow horse-trading in light of the Constitutional amendments expected to be tabled by the government.
“We can hold you in contempt of court [for this statement],” said CJP Isa.
Moving on, the chief justice asked Barrister Zafar if he would be ready to act as amicus curiae to which the latter replied in the affirmative.
The court then appointed the lawyer as amicus curiae after SCBA President Shahzad Shaukat said that he didn’t oppose the said notion after which the PTI lawyer continued his arguments before the court.
Addressing the PTI counsel, CJP Isa said all the political parties should sit together and settle their issues, clarifying that “there is no division among judges”.
Justice Mandokhail asked Pakistan Peoples Party’s (PPP) Farooq H Naek if President Asif Ali Zardari agreed with the apex court’s majority verdict or not, the lawyer said: “Nothing has come on record from the president about whether whom he agrees or disagrees with.”
Upon the lawyer‘s reply, the top judge asked: “Should the court send the matter to the president to decide which opinion he agrees with?”
The Additional Attorney General, Amir Rehman, opposed sending the matter to the president.
“The constitutional petitions have also been wrapped up along with the reference. This matter, therefore, cannot be referred to the president.”
Rehman added that the apex court declared that the opinion on the reference would be binding on the state. “The state is bound by the opinion of the Supreme Court.”
The CJP then said that a member, who does not vote, can also be disqualified.
“If a court decision is the cause of disqualification, the appeal will be invalid,” the CJP said.
