The Supreme Court accepted on Thursday a review petition against its 2022 verdict related to the defection clause under Article 63-A of the Constitution.
A five-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa and including Justices Naeem Akhtar Afghan, Aminuddin Khan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail, and Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, resumed hearing the review plea filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) in June 2022.
During the hearing, Barrister Ali Zafar said his client, Imran Khan, wants to argue the case through a video link.
The PTI senator said that the former PM had objections on the bench. The counsel added that if Imran was not allowed to appear on video link, he has asked to put some things before the court.
The CJP told Barrister Zafar that he was not only a lawyer for his client, but also an officer of the court.
Background
In 2022, the SC announced that parliamentarians cannot vote against their party policy, adding that the votes of dissident lawmakers will not be counted.
The court, issuing its verdict on the presidential reference that sought its interpretation of Article 63-A of the Constitution, which pertains to the disqualification of lawmakers over defection, said the “article concerned cannot be interpreted alone.”
CJP makes observation about Article 63-A verdict: Apparently, it intended to weaken no-trust motions
The verdict by the top court was a 3-2 split decision, with a majority of the judges not allowing lawmakers to vote against the party line in four instances outlined under Article 63-A. These four instances are the election of a prime minister and chief minister; a vote of confidence or no-confidence; a Constitution amendment bill; and a money bill.
Later, the Supreme Court Bar Association’s (SCBA) requested the SC to direct all state functionaries to act strictly in accordance with the Constitution and the law, and ask them to restrain from acting in any manner detrimental to and unwarranted by the Constitution.
“The apex court’s opinion about not counting the dissident’s votes is against the Constitution and equal to interference in it,” the SCBA said.
Article 63-A
According to Article 63 (A) of the Constitution, a parliamentarian can be disqualified on grounds of defection if he votes or abstains from voting in the House contrary to any direction issued by the parliamentary party to which he belongs, in relation to the election of the prime minister or chief minister; or a vote of confidence or a vote of no-confidence; or a money bill or a Constitution (amendment) bill.
The Article says that the party head has to declare in writing that the MNA concerned has defected but before making the declaration, the party head will provide such member with an opportunity to show cause as to why such declaration may not be made against him.
After giving the member a chance to explain their reasons, the party head will forward the declaration to the speaker, who will forward it to the chief election commissioner (CEC).
The CEC will then have 30 days to confirm the declaration. If confirmed by the CEC, the member “shall cease to be a member of the House and his seat shall become vacant”.
Comments