Pakistan Supreme Court Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial said on the 10th, “All orders and actions issued by the Prime Minister and the President regarding the dissolution of the National Assembly will be in accordance with the orders of the court.”
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court observed the situation in Korea after President Arif dissolved the National Assembly after the National Assembly (NA) Vice-Chairman’s bill of no confidence for Prime Minister Imran Khan was rejected. Apex Court spokeswoman Alvi said Sunday.
The case was heard today by three members of the Supreme Court, consisting of CJP Bandial, Supreme Court Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Supreme Court Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar.
Assad Rahim, a lawyer, said the “status of the National Assembly is in the air” until a court order is issued following the Chief Justice’s observations of the actions of the prime minister and president.
In a later issued order, the court did not elaborate on NA’s status, but told Pakistan’s Attorney General Khalid Khalid Jawed Khan. [deputy speaker’s] It is a decision to dismiss the distrust consent in accordance with Article 5 of the Constitution.”
Article 5 obliges all citizens to abide by the Constitution and laws, and stipulates that “Loyalty to the State is the basic duty of all citizens.”
Copies are available in your order. Serb.comThe court further added that “at first glance, it asserts that no findings were recorded in the case and that no hearing was granted to the affected parties.”
He continued, “We would like to examine whether such an act (rejection of the application for non-confidence pursuant to Article 5) is protected by deportation (deprivation of jurisdiction by the court) pursuant to Article 69 of the Constitution.”
Article 69 of the Constitution essentially limits the jurisdiction of courts to exercise powers over members of parliament or public officials with respect to their function of regulating parliamentary proceedings.
“No officer or member of the Majlis-i-Shoora (Parliament) who is empowered by or under the Constitution to regulate procedures or conduct business or to maintain order in Majlis-i-Shoora is subject to any jurisdiction. Article 2 of all courts in relation to the exercise of
The first article in this article says:
keep public order”
At the hearing that day, the chief justice of the Supreme Court ordered all political parties to act responsibly, saying that the state’s legal and order situation should not be deteriorated.
The Chief Justice said no state agency should be unconstitutional and no one should try to take advantage of the situation. “Public order must be maintained,” said CJP.
He said the courts do not want the hearing to be delayed on the grounds of Ramazan and must notify all parties. Judge Bandial also ordered the Interior and Defense Ministers to brief the courts on the law and order situation.
The Chief Justice ordered the PPP’s request to be granted and said the court would review the Vice-Chairman’s action. However, the court rejected the request to defer the vice-chairman’s ruling and directed the prosecutor-general to file it tomorrow.
Justice Bandial said President Alvi should be the accused in the case because it is “a matter of great importance”. He also ordered the Supreme Court Bar Association and all political parties to be respondents in the suo motu notice.
The court notified Attorney General Khalid Khalid Jawed Khan, speakers, vice-chairmen, defense ministers, interior ministers and all political parties, and postponed the hearing of the case until Monday.
The court order says a larger court will hear the case tomorrow at 1pm.
Hearings on Punjab Parliamentary Procedures
Today’s court hearing also dealt with the process of delaying the vote on the Prime Minister at today’s Punjab Provincial Parliament (PA) meeting.
Judge Mazhar asked what reasons were given for the postponement, and PML-N advocate Azam Nazeer Tarar said the PA Vice-Chairman offered nothing. “Attempts are also being made to create a constitutional crisis in Punjab,” he said.
The Chief Justice said that the court could not interfere beyond a certain extent in the procedures of the NIS, and that the court was aware of the situation. He added that if a request comes in from the PA, it will be scrutinized.
Denial of non-confidence consent
The country’s weeks of political turmoil culminated today when NA Vice Chairman Qasim Suri passed the long-awaited House Speaker without allowing him to vote on a no-confidence bill for Prime Minister Imran.
Suri, who presided over the session, rejected the shocking proposal, saying it violated Article 5 of the Constitution.
At the beginning of the session, Pakistan’s Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI)’s Fawad Chaudhry took a say and cited the clause, repeating the prime minister’s previous claims that there was a foreign conspiracy behind the move to overthrow the government.
“On March 7th, our ambassador to Korea was invited to a meeting attended by representatives of other countries. At the meeting, I heard that an objection against Prime Minister Imran was submitted,” he said. Untrustworthy movement.
“I’ve heard that relations with Pakistan depend on the success of the no-confidence bill. If the no-confidence plan fails, Pakistan’s road will be very difficult. This is an operation for regime change by foreign governments,” he insisted.
The minister questioned how this could be allowed and urged the vice-chairman to decide the constitutionality of the no-confidence measure.
In response, Suri pointed out that this item was submitted on March 8 and should be in accordance with the law and the Constitution. “No foreign power is allowed to overthrow an elected government through conspiracy,” he added, adding that the claim made by the minister “is valid.”
He rejected the proposal, finding it “contrary” to the law, constitution and rules.
Enraged by the NA process, the opposition decided to hold its own meeting in the House of Representatives with PML-N’s Ayaz Sadiq sitting in the chair.
According to PPP’s Sherry Rehman, they went through their own process with 195 MPs who voted in favor of the no-confidence measure.
dissolution of NA
Then, in another shocking move, Prime Minister Imran said in a speech to the nation that he had advised the president to “dissolve the assembly.”
He also said that the state congratulated the country for rejecting the no-confidence bill, saying that the vice-chairman “refused to attempt a regime change.” [and] foreign conspiracies”.
The prime minister also added that he had sent a letter to the president recommending the dissolution of the parliament. Democrats need to be open to the public and hold elections so the people can decide who they want, he added.
“Prepare for elections. Corrupt forces cannot determine the future of the country. Once Parliament is dissolved, the process for the next election and governing government will begin,” he added.
President Albi dissolved the NA on the advice of Prime Minister Imran under Article 58 of the Constitution.
Fawad Chaudhry confirmed progress in a tweet, adding that while Prime Minister Imran remained in office under Article 224 of the Constitution relating to elections and by-elections, his cabinet had also been dissolved.
Meanwhile, PTI’s Farrukh Habib said the new elections would be held in 90 days.
The situation unfolded as opposition leaders accused the government of blatant constitutional violations and urged the SC to become aware of the situation and intervene.
‘Political decisions should not be made in court’
Later, in an interview with media outside the SC, Fawad Chaudhry argued that Congress was a separate body and that today’s NA rulings cannot be challenged by any court.
“Political decisions shouldn’t go to court,” he said. “Now the process seems to have progressed.”
Chaudhry said the president had dissolved the NA on the advice of the prime minister and that elections would be held within 90 days.
He said within two to three days a letter would be sent to “the former leader of the opposition Shebaz Sharif” requesting “their names for the Provisional Government”.
When asked, he added that the military had nothing to do with the current situation. “This issue has to do with Congress,” he said.
In an evening interview with a journalist, Chaudhry said the courts had no “power to judge” the speaker’s verdict, as provided for in Article 69 of the Constitution.