Senate caught up in a paradox

In the backdrop of no-confidence motion moved by the joint opposition against Chairman Senate Sadiq Sanjrani, the Upper House of the Parliament is caught up in a paradox, as only the chairman Senate is constitutionally empowered to summon the requisitioned session of the Senate but he cannot preside over a session in which a no-confidence motion is considered against him. On Saturday, the chairman Senate summoned the Upper House's session on July 23 (today) on a requisition moved by the opposition parties.
The House would debate the no-confidence motion moved on July 9 against Sanjrani by the joint opposition followed by the submission of the related requisition the same day (July 9) to convene Senate session. On Sunday, President Arif Alvi summoned the Senate session on August 1, which has led to confusion as to why the President had to summon the Senate session when the chairman Senate had already summoned it on July 23.
According to a well-placed source in the Senate Secretariat, the existing rules related to Senate's legislative business allow only the chairman Senate to summon a requisitioned session but the rules also do not allow the chairman Senate to preside over the Senate session in which no-confidence motion is considered against him and therefore voting on no-confidence motion against the chairman Senate cannot take place in a requisitioned session.
However, Pakistan Peoples Party's (PPP) Parliamentary Leader in Senate Sherry Rehman disagreed to this. Speaking to Business Recorder, she said that there is no constitutional bar on voting on no-confidence motion in a requisitioned session in the light of the Rule 12 (11) of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Senate 2012. "They (treasury benches) are using delaying tactics because they know the opposition would outnumber them when voting on no-confidence motion against chairman Senate takes place. That's why they are trying to delay the voting as much as possible," she said, adding that the government is behind the delay in voting on confidence motion that would take place on August 1.
The Rule 12 (11) reads, "If the session during which notice has been given-has been convened by the Chairman in pursuance of Article 61 read with clause (3) of Article 54 of the Constitution, the Senate shall not be prorogued until the motion has been disposed of or, if leave is granted, the resolution has been voted upon."
The Article 54 (3) reads, "On a requisition signed by not less than one-fourth of the total membership of the National Assembly, the Speaker shall summon the National Assembly to meet, at such time and place as he thinks fit, within fourteen days of the receipt of the requisition; and when the Speaker has summoned the Assembly only he may prorogue it."
The Article 61 reads, "The provisions of clauses- (3) of Article 54-shall apply to the Senate as they apply to the National Assembly and, in their application to the Senate, shall have effect as if references therein to the National Assembly, Speaker and Deputy Speaker were references, respectively, to the Senate, Chairman and Deputy Chairman."
The source in the Senate Secretariat said that the chairman Senate had to summon the requisitioned session because he is constitutionally bound to summon the session within fourteen days of the submission of the said requisition, as per the Article 54 (3) read with Article 61, of Pakistan's constitution. Given that the requisition was moved by the joint opposition on July 9, July 23 was the last day to summon the requisitioned session, which was finally summoned by the chairman Senate on the said date.
On February 10, 2016, Raza Rabbani, the then chairman Senate, issued a detailed ruling on "Procedure regarding treatment of business during a requisitioned session." According to the ruling, "The authority to summon requisitioned session lies entirely with the Custodian of the House (chairman Senate) with no role of any kind to any of the executive authority or the President. The authority to prorogue such a session is also the sole discretion of the Custodian of the House." The ruling cites Article 54 (3) read with Article 61 in its support.
On the other hand, the Rule 12 (5) of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Senate 2012 makes it clear that the chairman/deputy chairman cannot preside over the session in which no-confidence motion is moved against him.
The Rule 12 (5) reads, "The Chairman or, as the case may be, the Deputy Chairman shall not preside over a sitting of the Senate in which a resolution for his removal from office is fixed for consideration."
The source said, "The Senate would debate no-confidence resolution in the requisitioned session starting on July 23 but the house would formally take up the motion for a vote in the August 1 session summoned by the President. This has been done keeping in view the paradoxical situation the Senate is presently faced with. Needless to mention that such a situation never arose before since no-confidence motion was never moved against a chairman Senate before Sanjrani," an insider pointed out.