“I will rely on the legislation of elected representatives, not that enacted by a dictator,” says CJP Isa
- Lifetime disqualification and the modified electoral law could not coexist.
- Nawaz, Tareen disqualified by SC under Article 62(1)(f) in 2017.
- Amendments to the Electoral Law reduced the disqualification limit to five years.
ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa has said that the Supreme Court will try to conclude the hearing on the life disqualification case on January 4 (Thursday), an important ruling that will determine whether the ineligibility of legislators to participate in elections must be for life or five years under the amended Electoral Law of 2017 in accordance with Article 62 (1) (F).
A larger seven-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa heard the case of lifetime disqualification of legislators.
The other members of the court include Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Musarat Hilali.
The case proceedings were broadcast live on the SC website and YouTube channel.
On December 11, 2023, the Chief Justice, while heading a three-member bench hearing a matter related to the disqualification of a former PML-N provincial legislator, Sardar Meer Badshah Khan Qaisrani, last month, took note of the contradiction between his sentence and the legislation. through an amendment to the Electoral Law regarding lifetime disqualification.
The Chief Justice had observed that the Supreme Court ruling on lifetime disqualification and the amendments introduced in the Electoral Act, 2017 could not exist simultaneously.
He also said that the legislation enacted by Parliament over the Electoral Law or the ruling issued by the Supreme Court will prevail.
A high court judgment in 2018 ruled that anyone disqualified under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution would be sentenced to life imprisonment.
Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and then Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Jahangir Tareen were disqualified by the Supreme Court under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution in 2017.
The court ruled that Nawaz had been dishonest with parliament and the courts and therefore could not be considered fit for office.
An accountability court subsequently awarded him 10 years in prison in the Avenfield Apartments and seven years in the Al-Azizia references.
However, the Islamabad High Court acquitted him in both cases after the former prime minister returned to the country.
In 2023, the PDM coalition government made an amendment to the 2017 Electoral Law, reducing the legislator’s disqualification to five years retrospectively.
The matter is of immense importance as the general elections will be held on February 8, while the Election Commission of Pakistan has rejected the nomination papers of most of the PTI’s top candidate aspirants, including its founder Imran Khan.
The electoral body, however, accepted the nomination papers of most of the PML-N candidates, including its supremo Nawaz, drawing criticism from PTI leaders over the role of the commission.
hearing
At the beginning of the hearing, Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan implored the court to review its decision on the lifetime disqualification.
CJP Isa asked the AGP what should prevail in his opinion: the amended Electoral Act of 2017 or the Supreme Court ruling on lifetime disqualification.
The AGP said it would support the 2017 Electoral Act as enacted by the federal government.
However, the AGP said the declaration of lifetime disqualification will remain effective unless the Supreme Court verdict remains in force.
Justice Shah wondered whether it was possible to amend the Constitution by simple legislation or whether a constitutional amendment was necessary.
Justice Mazhar said that the limit of disqualification is not fixed in Article 62 (1) (F).
A person convicted of murder and treason could stand for election after a ban of a few years, Justice Shah said, asking whether it is inappropriate to disqualify someone for life for a “small reason”.
After Tareen’s lawyer Makhdom Ali Khan informed the court that Article 62 was added to the Constitution by presidential order in 1985, CJP Isa questioned whether a person who removed judges and violated the Constitution was of good character.
The CJP was referring to former military ruler General (retd) Ziaul Haq.
CJP Isa said that in his opinion, the original Constitution should be relied upon if there is any contradiction between a Constitution and amendments made to the Constitution subsequently.
“I will rely on the legislation [enacted] by elected representatives and not by [laws introduced] by the dictator,” he observed.
What is the difference between articles 62 and 63?
During the hearing of the case, CJP Isa asked Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan to explain the difference between Articles 62 and 63.
To which, the AGP said that Article 62 deals with the eligibility of parliamentarians while Article 63 relates to disqualification.
The CJP observed that the sections of Article 62 dealing with the character of the holder of a public office created difficulties.
“How can you determine a person’s character? Is the attorney general a person of good character? The CJP stressed saying that he asked the question related to AGP as an example.
The CJP said its supporters would say that a person in question has a high character, while its opponents would describe his character as the worst.
CJP Isa observed that according to Islamic norms, no one can be declared a person of high character.
