The ruling parties obtained another victory on the legal front as a constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court annulled the judgment of the SC on July 12, 2024, which had raised the PTI as a parliamentary party and allowed it to obtain seats reserved for the legislatures.
“For detailed reasons to register later, subject to an amplification or elucidation which can be deemed appropriate, by the majority of 7, all civil examination petitions are authorized and the disputed majority judgment of 12.07.2024 is canceled.
“Consequently, the civil call nos 33 of 2024 and 334 of 2024 deposited by the sic [Sunni Ittehad Council] are rejected and the judgment rendered by the High Court of Peshawar (PHC) is restored, “said a short order issued by a CB of 10 members, led by Judge Amicin Khan.
In addition to judge Khan, the majority ordinance was signed by judge Musarrat Hilali, judge Naeem Akhter Afghan, judge Shahid Bilal Hassan, judge Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar, judge Aamer Faroo and judge Ali Baqar Najafi.
On January 13, 2024, a bench of SC of three members confirmed the electoral commission of the Pakistan Electoral Commission (ECP) on December 22, 2023 declaring the intra-party polls of the PTI Nul and non-Avenus.
Consequently of the Verdict SC and its “misinterpretation” by the ECP, the majority of the PTI candidates had to contest the general elections of February 8, 2024 as independent.
Eighty independent candidates reached the National Assembly and then joined the SIC in an apparent offer to demand seats reserved for women and minorities. The ECP, however, refused to allocate the seats to the party, a decision that the SIC challenged before the Supreme Court.
On July 12, 2024, a complete bench of the Supreme Court through a majority of 8 to 5 raised the PTI as a parliamentary party, noting that 39 of the legislators who had submitted certificates of their affiliation with the PTI with their application documents were already PTI legislators.
The SC judged that the remaining 41 legislators who had not submitted the affiliation certificates at the time of the submission of appointment documents could now do it within 15 days.
The ruling coalition subsequently filed a review against the decision of the SC. In May this year, a CB of 11 members resumed the examination petitions filed against the majority order of SC.
The CB unveiled its short order on Friday. Given the order, nearly 80 seats reserved in national and provincial legislatures will be distributed between parliamentary parties, with the exception of the SIC.
The judgment has paved the way for the management coalition to obtain two thirds of the majority in Parliament, which will have important implications for national policy.
However, some experts believe that the short -term order has further broken the credibility of the judiciary of the constitutional amendment after the 26th, which already faces a battle of perception.
The order also ended the possibility for the largest political party – the PTI – to enter the Parliament. The order will also affect the elections in the Senate in the assembly of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KP). There are reports that the PTI-SIC government in the KP is also in danger given the decision.
The majority decision did not specify how the reserved seats will be distributed between the other parties and what will be the implications to give these seats to the parties.
Some lawyers believe that short -term order has also weakened democracy in the country. They declared that the majority judges by the order of July 12 had attempted to restore democracy, but that their efforts were wasted by their judges.
Commenting on the short -term order, the SIC’s main lawyer, Faisal Siddiqi, said: “This judgment shows the dark ghost of [Justice Qazi] Faez Isa is alive and launched. The trip from the flight of general elections to theft of reserved seats is finished. “”
Lawyer Asad Rahim Khan said the CB showed “remarkable consistency and has issued another terrible verdict”. For the first time in our history, he said, the political parties that have lost the elections will be distributed the winner’s seats, despite the fact that no law in the country allows this.
“Instead, we have a 12 -member examination bench – mainly cleaned up judges from the original bench, in total violation of the rules of the Supreme Court – judging that random technical details are enough to defeat the electorate and upset its representatives,” he added.
“In another Black Swan event, this 12 -member examination bench overturned the verdict of a 13 -member bench! But the black swans are the new normal after the 26th amendment.
“This is only the last tragedy in a one-year judicial surrender. A rejected regime will now be handed over to a majority of two thirds, for having torn the Constitution,” he added.
Abdul Moiz Jaferii Advocate said that this decision is an underscalaureate erosion of democratic principles through defective judicial processes and engineering. He followed other corrosive decisions that started several years ago and culminated in the January 13 judgment by the bench led by Judge Isa.
“While we descend from the other side of the mountain, there are several other corrosive decisions of this type that I am sure,” he said. “We can only hope that each point of these points going down will be recorded and broadcast live. I would like to thank my Lords for putting this on the disc.”
He said that there should be a permanence in the process in which the judiciary participates today, so that it can be taught in the lawyers of tomorrow. “Whether it is as a warning or as an example to follow-has not yet been determined,” he added.
However, Hafiz Ehsaan Ahmed Khokhar said that the Supreme Court is a Constitutional Court responsible for interpreting – and not to rewrite – the Constitution. His jurisdiction is circumscribed by legal limits.
“Today’s majority decision has respected these limits and reaffirmed the binding nature of articles 51 and 106 of the Constitution.
“He rightly judged that only political parties that meet pre -electoral requirements, dispute the elections within the framework of a common symbol, submit lists of priorities within the prescribed period and guarantee at least one general seat, are entitled to reserved seats.
“This judgment restores not only constitutional clarity and electoral equity, but also marks a critical turning point to restore legal discipline and institutional balance in the democratic framework of Pakistan,” he added.
Some higher lawyers have said that the examination order had been accepted by a majority of 10 to 2 judges.
Order
The ordinance indicates that one of the members of the largest bench – Judge Salahuddin Panhwar – for certain reasons, rewritten to hear the case and contributed to his separate note. Therefore, the bench was reconstituted with all available members of the CB.
“Initially, this CB was formed for having heard the aforementioned requests by 13 honorable judges of this court, but two of them – judge Ayesha in Malik and judge Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi – on the first date of hearing, rejected all requests for revision”
The ordinance also declared that judge Jamal Khan Mandokhail, for reasons to register later, partly authorized examination petitions and maintained his initial order concerning 39 seats but examined the majority judgment at the point of 41 seats.
“While judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar and judge Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, for reasons to register later, also examined the judgment and authorized the examination petitions with the rider that, since the factual controversy or the disputed questions of facts, the directions are not taken by the Ploc Documents / Declaration and other relevant documents of the 80 candidates returned to their novo exercise Affiliation and make the appropriate decision in accordance with the law and applicable rules for the allocation of reserve seats within 15 days from the reception of the copy of this order.
Interestingly, the two judges examined their own opinion. They had approved the majority decision of July 12.
