Connect with us

Politics

Will use Constitution if PTI-govt talks fail, warns CJP Bandial

Published

3 years ago

on

  • Court will not interfere in negotiations nor give any instructions, says CJP.
  • There is a “break” in the negotiations, not a “break-up”, adds Saad Rafique.
  • Shah Mehmood Qureshi says PTI has “withdrawn” from negotiations.

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial warned that if the talks between the government and the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) failed then the Supreme Court would use the Constitution to implement its verdict of holding elections in Punjab on May 14.

The warning was issued when CJP Bandial resumed the hearing of the petition seeking simultaneous elections across the country.

Apart from the CJP, the three-member bench included Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar.

The apex court bench heard the PTI petition that challenged the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) order to hold Punjab elections in October.

Later, another petition was filed by a citizen, Sardar Kashif Khan, nominating the federal government, the ECP, and major political parties as respondents seeking the holding of polls on the same date across the country.

In the last hearing on April 27, the three-member Supreme Court bench directed the government and PTI to hold talks while making it clear that its April 4 order on Punjab Assembly elections had remained unchanged.

More time needed for negotiations, says Naek

At the outset of the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan arrived at the rostrum and shared that the government has submitted its response on the talks with the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). He then said that Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) lawyer Farooq H Naek would brief the court about the negotiations.

Naek informed the court that the federal government had filed a combined petition regarding the date of the Punjab elections.

Briefing the court about the negotiations held in the office of Senate Chairman Sadiq Sanjrani, Naek shared that the former had played the role of a “facilitator” during the negotiations.

He shared that there had been five rounds of negotiations between the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and the ruling alliance.

“The coalition parties informed PTI about the current economic situation in the country and the ongoing negotiations with the IMF,” Naik said. He added that the PTI also agreed on the dire economic situation.

He then said that while the ruling alliance had agreed to dissolve the National Assembly in August, “more time is needed for negotiations.”

In response to this the CJP inquired, why the IMF agreement had been emphasised in the government’s response.

“The issue in the court is constitutional, not political,” he remarked, adding that the court leaves the political matter to the political parties.

Instead, he asked that the ruling alliance explain why the approval of IMF agreement and trade policy is so important in the matter.

In response, Naek said that the IMF loan was “necessary for the budget.” He contended that if the assemblies were dissolved, the budget would not be approved.

“If the Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assemblies had not been dissolved, this crisis would not have occurred,” he said, adding that the “crisis” was also wasting the court’s time.

Naek maintained that resolving the matter through understanding was the best recourse.

The chief justice then asked whether the IMF loan would be added to the government’s fund reserves or be used in the repayment of debts.

“The finance minister can give this answer,” Naek responded.

He then asked Senator Naek: “Has PTI recognised or rejected the importance of the budget?”

The chief justice remarked that no one can deny that the Constitution mandates elections be held within 90 days of the assembly’s dissolution.

The PPP lawyer agreed and added that there were no two opinions on the issue.

“This is a matter of complying with the Constitutional along with one of public importance. The court has given a decision on holding elections in 90 days,” CJP Bandial said, adding that he had heard the position of both sides on television last night.

However, he warned that were the negotiation to fail, the court would not sit idle and would ensure that the elections are held on May 14, as per the Constitution.

“We will use the constitution to ensure that the court’s order is followed,” he said, adding the court is performing its duty.

The chief justice defended the top court’s role in the matter and addressed accusations of “not abiding by the Constitution” levelled against it.

“It was said that in the past, the court did not respect the Constitution which caused damage,” he said while referring to the statements made in the National Assembly. However, he said that the court always respected everyone’s opinion and did not respond to any criticism.

“We do not even get angry, because if we do our decisions may be affected.” He asked Naek to compare the level of the conversation at the court and at the National Assembly.

Govt did not take case seriously:CJP 

Naek then said that the court will have to re-examine the issue of conducting elections within 90 days.

“It is necessary to have caretaker governments for elections, or no one will accept the results of the elections,” he maintained.

“When the [case began] on February 23 you started pointing fingers. All these points were not raised at that time?” said CJP Bandial. He also slammed the government for not taking the constitutional process “seriously”.

Naek responded: “We were not heard by the court.”

At this the top judge replied that when the apex court had started the hearing, the government had boycotted it.

He said that after the boycott, the SC also bid “good bye” to the government.

He said that the government never tried to get a judgment on the matter previously and had, instead, consistently argued whether the petition has been rejected or accepted.

“When Justice Athar Minallah raised the point of restoring the assemblies, the government was not interested,” the CJP lambasted.

“Just look at today’s conversation, no one is talking about rulings or law,” said the top judge. He further censured the government for failing to file a review petition after the court had initially announced the election date.

“The government is showing interest in politics and not in law,” remarked CJP Bandial, adding that great sacrifices are being made for the sake of the country.”

“We lost six soldiers yesterday, this is our great loss, he said, “Apart from the economic situation, we are facing an important problem of security as well.”

If the politicians are left to their own devices, where will the constitution go? He asked.

PTI ready for simultaneous elections: Ali Zafar

PTI lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar, who was also part of the negotiating team, informed the bench that his party took part in the parleys with seriousness. He added that both the government and PTI have shown an inclination for holding polls on the same day but warned that the government might use the negotiations to prolong the issue.

“Everyone has to follow the decision of the Supreme Court,” said Zafar. However, he added that when they asked the government to inform the court about the dissolution of the National Assembly they did not agree to it.

“Whatever the Supreme Court rules we will accept it [but] Supreme Court decision should be implemented,” said Zafar.

Holding polls in one province may be destructive: Saad 

After Zafar, Railways Minister Khawaja Saad Rafique came to the rostrum and told the bench he’s not a lawyer so he may not be able to address the court properly but would speak the truth.

“With respect, since 2017 Supreme Court committed injustices against us,” the minister said, adding that they did not want confrontation with institutions.

“The Constitution mentions about holding polls in 90 days but also talks about free and fair elections,” Rafique said, warning that polls in Punjab will create more problems.

“We have lost half the country over elections once. Holding polls in one province may be destructive,” the minister said.

He added that polls were delayed during the 1988 floods and after the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

Rafique also asked the court that the government had filed a review petition on the Article 63-A case.

“We are putting up that petition attorney general has been informed about it,” responded CJP Bandial, adding that if this case is wrapped up then the Supreme Court can look into other matters.

“If more time is granted then a [better] situation might arise,” said the minister. He added that involving courts in political matters creates problems.

“First Zia, then Musharraf, and the recent veiled martial law ended [as well] so this time will also pass by,” said the minister.

CJP Bandial responded that elections were held during major wars, and in Turkey despite an earthquake. He added that the things being told to the court could have been said in writing.

“The budget could have been presented in May. It is not necessary that the budget should be presented on June 30,” said the top judge.

Moving on, CJP Bandial said that the issue must be ended for the sake of the country.

The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader responded that there is consensus on three points and it will be developed on the fourth one as well.

“The current break in ongoing talks is not that huge,” said Rafique.

The government then requested more time for the talks and urged the court not to issue any directions after the case, saying that there was a “break” in the negotiations — not a “break-up”. 

Court not to interfere in talks: CJP

Chief Justice Bandial said that the court will not interfere in the negotiations nor give any instructions. However, he said, “Today is Friday. If negotiations are to be held, they should be started.”

He then added that if negotiations do not take place, the matter would be looked into after a few days.

Advocate Shah Khawar — who filed the petition on behalf of Sardar Kashif Khan — then urged the government to file a review, adding that the ECP’s request for review had come.

He further suggested that Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and the PTI chief be taken on video link.

“After listening to Imran Khan and the prime minister, we can find a solution sooner,” advocate Khawar said.

However, the CJP remarked that both the prime minister and Imran are “busy people”.

“Representatives of Imran and PM Shehbaz are present here, we only like listening to those in black coats,” he said.

However, he added that it was yet to be seen if the ECP had a right to request revision or not.

CJP Bandial maintained that the time for reviewing the election decision had passed.

PTI has withdrawn from talks: Qureshi

Following Khawar, PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi came to the rostrum.

He said: “People sitting in the government are arrogant.”

He further said that the reply filed by the government’s committee only had the signatures of the finance minister.

The chief justice then said: “The attorney general prepared an application at night which we are hearing without numbering.”

He reiterated that the court only wanted to “facilitate” the matter and said that there should be a consensus on the date of elections on the same day.

Qureshi then asserted that the government was not having any talks with the IMF.

“We are aware of the financial difficulties, but the agreement with the IMF is stalled, he said, adding that the country was currently suffering from a political crisis.

The chief justice then asked him whether the PTI wanted negotiations or not.

“Tehreek-e-Insaf has withdrawn from negotiations,” the PTI leader replied.

After this, the SC bench concluded the hearing, with the CJP saying that the court would issue an “appropriate order”.

Senator Naek then requested the court to dispose of the petition today, requesting that the May 14 judgment be heard later.

However, Chief Justice Bandial responded: “If the court disposes of the case, the main purpose of the case will not be achieved.”

Naek then suggested that the case be concluded on the grounds that both parties agreed to hold the election on the same date.

The Chief Justice then said: “The matter has been left to the political process.”

This problem will be solved, Senator Naek said; however, the CJP responded by saying: “You only make promises.

“This point could have been given in writing that Punjab is a big province and smaller provinces will be affected by its elections.”

Govt-PTI negotiations

The negotiations — which were held in five formal and informal rounds — aimed at developing a consensus on a date for elections. However, despite agreeing to hold elections on the same date, the negotiating parties failed to reach a consensus on the date and submitted separate reports to the apex court.

On Wednesday, the Imran Khan-led PTI submitted its report to the Supreme Court on negotiations with the Pakistan Democratic Movement-led government, requesting it to ensure implementation of its April 4 judgement regarding holding elections to the Punjab Assembly on May 14.

In the report, the PTI — the main opposition party — apprised the court of progress on negotiations, saying it held three rounds of talks with the team of ruling PDM, an alliance of 13 political parties, in line with the commitment made to the top court in the Punjab elections delay case.

Earlier today, Finance Minister Ishaq Dar also informed the Supreme Court that the ruling alliance “believes that political issues can best be resolved through dialogue and are ready to resume” it in the “larger national interest”.

The government made the assurance in its four-page statement submitted to the court today. Dar submitted the statement on behalf of the government.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

Supreme Court annuls trials of civilians in military courts

Published

2 years ago

on

By

In a unanimous verdict, a five-member bench of the Supreme Court on Monday declared civilians’ trials in military courts null and void as it admitted the petitions challenging the trial of civilians involved in the May 9 riots triggered by the arrest of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan in a corruption case.

The five-member apex court bench — headed by Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan, and comprising Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Ayesha Malik — heard the petitions filed by the PTI chief and others on Monday.

The larger bench in its short verdict ordered that 102 accused arrested under the Army Act be tried in the criminal court and ruled that the trial of any civilian if held in military court has been declared null and void.  

The apex court had reserved the verdict earlier today after Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan completed his arguments centred around the domain and scope of the military courts to try the civilians under the Army Act. 

At the outset of the hearing today, petitioner lawyer Salman Akram Raja told the bench that trials of civilians already commenced before the top court’s verdict in the matter.

Responding to this, Justice Ahsan said the method of conducting proceedings of the case would be settled after Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan completed his arguments.

Presenting his arguments, the AGP said he would explain to the court why a constitutional amendment was necessary to form military courts in 2015 to try the terrorists.

Responding to Justice Ahsan’s query, AGP Awan said the accused who were tried in military courts were local as well as foreign nationals.

He said the accused would be tried under Section 2 (1) (D) of the Official Secrets Act and a trial under the Army Act would fulfill all the requirements of a criminal case.

“The trial of the May 9 accused will be held in line with the procedure of a criminal court,” the AGP said.

The AGP said the 21st Amendment was passed because the terrorists did not fall in the ambit of the Army Act.

“Amendment was necessary for the trial of terrorists [then] why amendment not required for the civilians? At the time of the 21st constitutional amendment, did the accused attack the army or installations?” inquired Justice Ahsan.

AGP Awan replied that the 21st Amendment included a provision to try accused involved in attacking restricted areas.

“How do civilians come under the ambit of the Army Act?” Justice Ahsan asked the AGP.

Justice Malik asked AGP Awan to explain what does Article 8 of the Constitution say. “According to Article 8, legislation against fundamental rights cannot be sustained,” the AGP responded.

Justice Malik observed that the Army Act was enacted to establish discipline in the forces. “How can the law of discipline in the armed forces be applied to civilians?” she inquired.

The AGP responded by saying that discipline of the forces is an internal matter while obstructing armed forces from discharging duties is a separate issue.

He said any person facing the charges under the Army Act can be tried in military courts.

“The laws you [AGP] are referring to are related to army discipline,” Justice Ahsan said.

Justice Malik inquired whether the provision of fundamental rights be left to the will of Parliament.

“The Constitution ensures the provision of fundamental rights at all costs,” she added.

If the court opened this door then even a traffic signal violator will be deprived of his fundamental rights, Justice Malik said.

The AGP told the bench that court-martial is not an established court under Article 175 of the Constitution.

At which, Justice Ahsan said court martials are not under Article 175 but are courts established under the Constitution and Law.

After hearing the arguments, the bench reserved the verdict on the petitions.

A day earlier, the federal government informed the apex court that the military trials of civilians had already commenced.

After concluding the hearing, Justice Ahsan hinted at issuing a short order on the petitions. 

The government told the court about the development related to trials in the military court in a miscellaneous application following orders of the top court on August 3, highlighting that at least 102 people were taken into custody due to their involvement in the attacks on military installations and establishments. 

Suspects express confidence in mly courts

The same day, expressing their “faith and confidence” in military authorities, nine of the May 9 suspects — who are currently in army’s custody — moved the Supreme Court, seeking an order for their trial in the military court be proceeded and concluded expeditiously to “meet the ends of justice”.

Nine out of more than 100 suspects, who were in the army’s custody, filed their petitions in the apex court via an advocate-on-record.

The May 9 riots were triggered almost across the country after former prime minister Imran Khan’s — who was removed from office via a vote of no confidence in April last year — arrest in the £190 million settlement case. Hundreds of PTI workers and senior leaders were put behind bars for their involvement in violence and attacks on military installations.

Last hearing

In response to the move by the then-government and military to try the May 9 protestors in military courts, PTI Chairman Imran Khan, former chief justice Jawwad S Khawaja, lawyer Aitzaz Ahsan, and five civil society members, including Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (Piler) Executive Director Karamat Ali, requested the apex court to declare the military trials “unconstitutional”.

The initial hearings were marred by objections on the bench formation and recusals by the judges. Eventually, the six-member bench heard the petitions.

However, in the last hearing on August 3, the then-chief justice Umar Ata Bandial said the apex court would stop the country’s army from resorting to any unconstitutional moves while hearing the pleas challenging the trial of civilians in military courts.

A six-member bench, led by the CJP and comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Justice Ayesha Malik, heard the case.

In the last hearing, the case was adjourned indefinitely after the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan assured the then CJP that the military trials would not proceed without informing the apex court.

Continue Reading

Politics

Arshad Sharif’s wife files lawsuit against Kenyan police over journalist’s killing

Published

2 years ago

on

By

  • Javeria Siddique filed lawsuit to “get justice for her husband”.
  • Lawsuit also seeks “public apology” from Kenyan attorney general.
  • Journalist was shot dead in October 2022 by Kenyan police officers.

NAIROBI: Slain journalist Arshad Sharif’s wife has registered a case against the Kenyan Elite police unit for her husband’s murder in Kenya, reported The News.

Javeria Siddique in her petition has made the attorney general of Kenya, national police service of the country and the director public prosecution respondents. 

She has urged that the officers involved in Sharif’s murder be put on trial and be punished for their crime.

She urged the court to issue directives to the Kenyan attorney general (AG) to apologise to Sharif’s family within seven days of court’s orders, admit facts, accept responsibility and issue a written apology at public level.

Sharif’s widow, while confirming the filing of the case, said: “I have got a case registered in Nairobi for seeking justice in murder case of my husband. We got the case registered against general service unit of Kenya because they committed crime publicly and then admitted it was matter of mistaken identity. But to me it was targeted murder. But Kenyan government never apologised. They never contacted us.”

The registration of the case comes after it was reported the five Kenyan police officers who were involved in the killing quietly resumed their duties without any action taken against them.

Nine months after the killing of the journalist at a roadblock in a remote part of the East African country, the five police officers involved in the brutal killing are enjoying full police perks and their suspensions have turned out to be only a whitewash by the Kenyan authorities.

A trusted security source revealed that the five cops involved in the fatal shootout are back to work and two of them have been promoted to senior ranks.

Kenya’s Independent Policing and Oversight Authority (IPOA), the body that is tasked with investigating the conduct of police officers, despite making a promise to give an update on Sharif’s murder within weeks has not made its findings public in over nine months.

Sharif had arrived in the Kenyan capital on August 20 and died on October 23 last year in a shootout in which his driver Khurram Ahmad survived miraculously.

The 49-year-old had fled Pakistan in August to avoid arrest after he was slapped with several cases including sedition charges over an interview with Shahbaz Gill, a former aide of Imran Khan. 

After reaching Kenya’s capital Nairobi, Sharif stayed at the Riverside penthouse of businessman Waqar Ahmad who is also Khurram’s brother who was driving him when he was killed.

The journalist was being driven from Ammodump Kwenia training camp, a joint which is owned by Waqar and they were heading to Nairobi County where he was staying.

Continue Reading

Politics

PTI urges ECP to issue order on election symbol

Published

2 years ago

on

By

  • ECP notice on inter-party elections “serious mistake,” says PTI.
  • ECP has no justification for depriving PTI of symbol: Senator Zafar.
  • 41 days passed but detailed decision not issued yet: PTI’s counsel.

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has urged the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to issue its verbal order regarding issuance of election symbol and reminded the electoral body of its constitutional duty to hold free and fair elections in the country, The News reported on Thursday.

Senator Barrister Syed Ali Zafar, the party’s counsel, on Wednesday filed an application with the Election Commission requesting for issuance of a detailed written order in the interest of justice and fairness.

The party has urged the Election Commission to issue a detailed decision without delay in light of its announcement concerning issuance of election symbols.

According to Senator Zafar, the Election Commission had issued a notice to the PTI for refusing to issue the symbol of “bat” on the basis of intra-party elections.

He insisted the commission’s notice on the basis of inter-party elections was a serious mistake, as the PTI had held intra-party elections on June 9, 2022 as per its constitution.

He maintained that the ECP had no justification of depriving the PTI of its symbol after holding the intra-party elections, as the electoral body had never objected to the intra-party elections but identified some defects in the submitted document, which had been removed.

The Election Commission in its August 30, 2023 decision, he pointed out, accepted the PTI’s decision to hold the intra-party elections and announced the decision to issue the election symbol of “bat” and after the August 30 decision of the Election Commission, the matter had become final and complete.

He recalled that at the time of the verbal announcement of the August 30 decision, the Election Commission announced to issue a detailed decision in this regard and this was widely highlighted in print, electronic and social media.

However, he noted, 41 days had passed since the August 30 decision, but a detailed decision had not yet been provided.

“PTI is the largest political party in the country, which is contesting the upcoming elections. Not issuing a detailed decision even after 41 days is a clear violation of fundamental rights, including articles 4, 9, 10A, 15, 16, 17 and 26 of the Constitution,” he said.

Ali Zafar insisted that according to the Constitution, the Election Commission was bound to hold free, fair, impartial and transparent elections, while avoiding detailed decisions was a deviation from this constitutional mandate.

Continue Reading

Trending