The Supreme Court of Pakistan unanimously accepted a review petition on Thursday. The petition challenged its 2022 decision regarding the defection clause under Article 63-A of the Constitution. The earlier verdict had declared that votes cast against the parliamentary party line in specific circumstances should not be counted. However, today’s ruling changes that, stating that such votes will now be counted in any future legislation.
The four specific instances outlined under Article 63-A include the election of the prime minister or chief minister, a vote of confidence or no-confidence, constitutional amendments, and money bills. This new ruling, delivered by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, could provide significant relief to the government, particularly in its efforts to secure the necessary votes for constitutional amendments, including those related to the judiciary.
Debate Over Constitutional Interpretation
The 2022 decision was a 3-2 split, with then-Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justices Ijazul Ahsan and Munib Akhtar supporting the majority view. Justices Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Jamal Khan Mandokhail dissented, stating that further interpretation of Article 63-A would equate to rewriting the Constitution. The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), which filed the review petition, held the same position.
A five-member bench, led by CJP Isa, including Justices Mandokhail, Miankhel, Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Aminuddin Khan, heard the SCBA’s plea. Justice Afghan replaced Justice Akhtar after the latter, along with senior puisne judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, declined to sit on the bench due to concerns about a recent ordinance on bench formation.
Read: Israel Bars UN Chief for Not Condemning Iran’s Strike on Israeli Territory
During an earlier hearing, CJP Isa had questioned the reasoning behind the 2022 decision. The court later dismissed objections raised by the petitioner’s lawyer, Ali Zafar, regarding the bench’s composition. Zafar, who represented former Prime Minister Imran Khan, argued for Khan’s appearance via video link, but the court pressed him to continue his legal assistance.
Announcing the court’s unanimous acceptance of the SCBA’s appeal, CJP Isa noted that a detailed verdict would follow. The ruling underscores that Article 63-A, which limits the voting powers of lawmakers to party lines, remains crucial. Lawmakers who violate this clause face disqualification and must vacate their seats, according to the Constitution.
Imran Khan’s Counsel Raises Objections Over Bench
At the outset of the hearing, Zafar argued that his client, Imran Khan, had objections regarding the bench. He also expressed concerns about the proposed constitutional amendments, saying they gave the impression of enabling horse-trading. CJP Isa warned Zafar against making such claims, as it could lead to contempt proceedings.
Zafar continued his arguments, explaining that the 2022 verdict helped prevent horse-trading. The court clarified that it had issued an opinion, not a judgment, in 2022. When Zafar announced his decision to boycott the proceedings, the CJP asked him to assist the court as an amicus curiae.
As the hearing progressed, the bench questioned whether a single judge’s opinion could override all of parliament. They also debated whether a judge could determine a lawmaker’s defection or whether this should remain the party leader’s prerogative. The court ultimately accepted the review petition, with a detailed verdict to be released later.
Follow us on Google News, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook,Whats App, and TikTok for latest updates
