Alvi, Imran, Suri, others violated sacred trust: SC

ISLAMABAD: A judge of the Supreme Court has said that President Dr Arif Alvi, former prime minister Imran Khan, former National Assembly speaker Asad Qaiser, its former deputy speaker Qasim Suri, and former law minister Fawad Chaudhry violated the sacred trust entrusted to them under the Constitution.

A five-member bench of the apex court — headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial and also comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Munib Akhtar, and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail — issued on Wednesday a detailed judgement on the ruling given by then deputy speaker of the National Assembly Qasim Suri that rejected a motion on no-confidence against then prime minister Imran Khan.

The court had on April 7 unanimously set aside the deputy speaker’s ruling, restored the National Assembly to its position of April 3, and held that the prime minister’s advice to the president to dissolve the legislature was contrary to the Constitution and of no legal effect. Justice Mazhar Alam and Justice Jamal Khan had agreed with the main judgement fully but added to it their own opinions on the matter of utmost significance.

In his note, Justice Mazhar Alam said: “The Constitution opens by stating that the exercise of authority ‘is a sacred trust’ and can only be exercised through the chosen representatives of the people. However, this sacred trust was violated amongst others by the President, PM, the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker and the Law Minister as the elected representatives of the people were prevented from voting on the resolution and for such blatant transgression of the Constitution there must be consequences and the law must take its course.”

Detailed judgment issued: Suri’s ruling infringed Opposition’s rights: SC

He found that the steps taken one after the other right from the rejection of the resolution by the deputy speaker till the dissolution of the National Assembly by the president were not performed in the ordinary course of business but were a result of premeditation and deliberations in order to defeat the resolution of vote of no-confidence while playing fraud on the Constitution. He further wrote: “To my understanding, Article 5 of the Constitution, which mandates ‘obedience to the Constitution’, was cited to violate the Constitution.

However, whether the stated acts attract Article 6 of the Constitution is also left open to be determined by the Parliamentarians as to whether they leave open the doors for such unconstitutional acts or take suitable measures to stop such-like mess in future.” The note further said that the Preamble/ Objectives Resolution of the Constitution mandates that the people of Pakistan “through the chosen representatives of the people” exercise their powers, and the most important power is the power to vote, but the deputy speaker in violation of the Constitution denied them the right to vote. The (deputy) speaker failed utterly to discharge his solemn duty, wrote Justice Mazhar Alam. The speaker appeared to have forgotten or ignored deliberately for certain reasons best known to him that he is required to discharge the duty enjoined upon him under the Constitution.

“The action of the speaker (of) rejecting the resolution vide impugned ruling would neither fall within the meaning of the term ‘any proceedings in the Parliament’ used in Article 69, nor such action could be described as an exercise of power by the Speaker of the House regulating the procedure or the conduct of business in the Assembly and, therefore, in my opinion, no question of immunity for such an action can arise under Article 69 of the Constitution.

The impugned ruling as such was a nullity in the eye of law, worthy of no credence,” said the note.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022