Islamabad: Supreme Court has accepted applications filed to nullify various articles of the Electoral Reforms Act 2017 for initial hearing.
The court has issued notices to all petitioners including federation and head of PML(N) Nawaz Sharif.
During the hearing the Chief Justice while giving remarks said that there are no two opinions on this matter that parliament is supreme. He said that supreme court has only powers of judicial review any law or constitutional articles.
On Monday a three member bench headed by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar consisting of Justice Faisal Arab and Justice Ijazul Ahsan have heard 13 applications filed by various political parties and personalities.
Chief Justice said to the lawyers of the petitioners first satisfy to determine the maintainability and tell how this matter is under the public interests is related to the basic rights. Chief Justice said there is no second opinion parliament is supreme and they have written the same remarks in the decision of the case of Jehangir Tareen. Parliament is the supreme in legislation of law and they are not above.
Justice Ijazul Ahsan questioned the counsel that what is in article 203 of the Election law, is it in conflict with the constitution and that should be declared null and void?
Chief Justice said that fact finding stage will come later on and first of all give arguments relating to the maintainability of the case.
Sheikh Rashid lawyer Farough Nasim said that in the Panama decision the opinion of Justice Ijazul Ahsan observation is very important in this context. He appended that this is the basic right of the public that such people may rule them, who are clean and corruption free. Therefore it is his basic right that the people who makes my government should not be involved in corruption and there should not be any court decision against them.
Justice Ijazul Ahsan questioned in the present political set up to what extent the party head can influence the legislation.
Lawyer Farough Nasim said that party head has a lot of powers because members of parliament on certain issues are bound to obey the order of the head of the party otherwise they are liable to face action.
Chief Justice remarked that to make law parliament is the supreme. He said they can not interference in the ambit of parliament as far as legislation is concerned and basic rights and public interests are interlinked. The law of the parliament can only be reviewed when it conflicts with the basic rights. They have to review such matters in the case which are in conflict with constitutional articles.
Farough Nasim said it is clear in the article 63A of the constitution that party head will issue tickets to the party members, it is a proof that party head controls the present members in the parliament. And it is essential for party head to be “Sadiq and Amin.”
Chief Justice questioned Barrister Farough Nasim that they are avoiding to use the word of disqualification. Do you want to say that if a person losses his parliament membership then he has no right of governance. How you can say that a disqualified person if heads the party then it is the violation of article 9.
Justice Ijazul Ahsan questioned Barrister Farough Nasim whether on the directive of head of party, a member can be ousted. He questioned more powers of the party head.
On which Barrister Farough Nasim said that to be party head by Nawaz Sharif is his personal case. But a person who is illegible to be a member of parliament but controls the party, is the violation of norms.
To head Nawaz Sharif a party is the violation of the court order in the case of Baz Mohammad Kakar. To declare null and void the court order in the Baz Mohammad Kakar case legislation was enacted. Senate has approved the resolution against this law by 52 votes. At which Chief Justice remarked if the case is so then why the parliament itself could not declare this law as null and void.
Earlier, at the outset of the proceeding Raheel Kamran the pleader of National Party requested to adjourn the hearing of the case. However the court rejected the request.
Another petitioner Lawyer Zulfikar Bhutta advocate requested time for preparations and issue notices to the stake holders.
Upon this the Chief Justice said first of all make a case for the notices, then the notices can be issued. Parliament is the supreme body for legislation. You say that the legislation made by parliament should be declared null and void.
Chief Justice said that there are norms and principles to declare a legislation null and void and how many laws have been declared null and void by the supreme court?
Chief Justice said that provide PLDs of the court decisions to declare a law null and void. It will not be so because these are political cases. On application issue notices not take the courts so easy. They have to follow the law.
Lawyer requested time to bring PLDs and could not prepare for the case because he was out of the city.
Upon this the Chief Justice said that he was out of the city and only returned last night. When the case was scheduled you should make preparations.
Later on after the hearing of the argument the court declared the case maintainable and issued notices to federation, Nawaz Sharif and other stake holders and hearing of the case was adjourned till 23 January.
