Political drama

Inshan Atta
The last couple of weeks have witnessed yet another bleak, dicey and unhealthy account of political drama in Pakistani politics. Although it is by no means new for country to experience such vicious power politics cycle, yet the ongoing political volatility and the crisis occupies a different standing because of the fact that it compelled judiciary to once again step in to address the issue when the pure political crisis morphed into constitutional dilemma, targeting constitutional supremacy and rule of law. The political saga began when ex – Prime Minister Imran khan came to realize that the combined opposition is now all set to table the motion of no confidence in the national assembly against him. His fear turned into a reality. And opposition did so on 8th march by tabling the motion of no confidence under article 95 of the constitution against Prime minister to oust him on the grounds of his losing confidence of the parliamentarians. Constitutionally, under article 54 of the constitution, the speaker of the national assembly bears the responsibility to summon the session within fourteen days after motion’s submission in the lower House to hold the voting on the motion. However, the speaker, who belongs to the Pakistan tahreeke insaf (PTI) , kept delaying the voting, which is a constitutional process in any democratic set up, multiple times by citing numerous fabricated alibis to justify his unconstitutional work to thwart the process. The postponement tactic by khan through speaker produced a sense of furry among opposition and civil society as well as it violated the constitution and democratic norms. It too debunked the khan’s reluctance to be constitutionally de seated. Khan cherishes to be in the power, perhaps more than anybody else. Khan is a power hungry political figure who could go to any lengths to be in power. After all, leaving the power is a tough task but if that is of cheif executive, it happens to be even more strenuous,then. Constitutionally bound speaker was supposed to summon the session to hold voting on the motion and encourage the constitutional process. So after having shelved the session a number of times, the speaker, after all, called on the session on 3rd of April to conduct voting on the motion of no confidence tabled against khan. But sadly, things came against what was anticipated as voting on the motion. The deputy speaker, who was presiding over the session because of absence of the speaker due to motion of no confidence against him, set a precedent by giving the ruling which dismissed the motion of no confidence against khan on the grounds of unsubstantiated allegations of foreign conspiracy behind the motion to oust khan. He articulated foreign intrigue involved in khan’s ouster as his rational behind the ruling. Article 5 of the constitution which talks about the loyalty to state and obedience to the Constitution was also cited as a reason behind the ruling. Soon after speaker gave the ruling to dismiss the motion of no confidence, the president, Arif Alvi, dissolved the assemblies on the advice of the prime minister. The Deputy speaker’s ruling and subsequent dissolution of the assemblies generated much furry and vexation among masses and gave birth to a considerable debate on the interpretation of the article 5 and ona demand of a strict investigation to clarify whether in reality there exists a conspiracy behind khan or not. Since the political situation in the country was spiraling out of hands after the ruling and later on the dissolution of the assemblies, the supreme Court of the country once again found itself compelled to step in to decide the fate of nation by addressing the crises. The pure political crisis turned into constitutional one and necessitated the supreme court intervention. The five judge bench was formed under the auspices of chief justice of Pakistan, Umar Atta Bandial, to check out the Constitutionality of the ruling by interpreting article 5 and assess the ‘conspiracy latter’ which was cited as reasons behind the motion to topple khan. Although there emerged various questions on how can judiciary step in to intervene the parliamentary matters, yet sensing the gravity of situation, the Supreme Court came in. And after a marathon evaluation of everything relevant, the apex Court in Pakistan political and legal history marked an example by declaring the ruling as unconstitutional and illegal. It has no legal and constitutional backing. It happens to be totally baseless and a politca ploy to help khan escape the motion of no confidence. Declaring the ruling unconstitutional and illegal automatically meant that the dissolution of assemblies is illegal too as prime minister is barred from the power to dissolve the assemblies when motion of confidence is lingering in the house. With declaration of both as unconstitutional, the apex Court retorted the assemblies and ordered the speaker to arrange a session on 9th of April to hold the voting on the motion of no confidence against khan.The historic supreme court verdict, no doubt, consolidated constitutional spirituality, democratic process, rule of law and most importantly once again ensured the reburial of the doctrine of the necessity which was in the offing due to deteriorating political situation. Its positive implications for county will be seen ahead in future as well as it gave precedence to constitution and democracy on the ego and self promoted political figure.