Punjab polls case: CJP Bandial 'realises' invoking Article 184/3 can lead to mistakes
Pakistan
A day earlier, CJP appreciates govt, ECP for chance in their stance regarding April 4 verdict
ISLAMABAD (Dunya News) – Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial remarked that the use Article 184/3 of the Constitution had increased, saying he had realised that it could also lead to mistake.
The top judge made the remarks when a three-member bench headed by him and comprising Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Ijazul Ahsan heard review petitions filed by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) and the provincial government seeking revisit of top court’s April 4 ruling regarding holding of elections in Punjab on May 14.
At the outset of the hearing, Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan came to the podium to share his view on some remarks of the bench made during yesterday’s (Tuesday) hearing.
The AGP said the court had asked why the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) failed to raise certain points earlier. He also mentioned the top court’s remarks regarding the government being stuck to his stance about the 3-4 majority order.
He asserted that he had also submitted his argument that elections in one province would affect the polls in the National Assembly, adding that the government had also mentioned the majority judgement in its response.
The top judge told the AGP that he did not need to worry as the court was here to listen to him. He added that if any important point was raised, the court would review it and take a decision in this regard.
Referring to yesterday’s arguments related to the jurisdiction of review, he assured that the court would not use the post against the government. CJP Bandial said they were sitting here just for the work of God alone.
Speaking about claims that the SC had provided PTI Chairman Imran Khan with a Mercedes for his appearance before the court on May 11, the chief justice declared the reports false, saying he did not use this vehicle.
The chief justice also asked the AGP to ask his colleagues to avoid using harsh words in parliament.
Subsequently, ECP lawyer Sajeel Swati resumed his arguments. He highlighted that the apex court always interpreted the Constitution as a “living document”. He said the Supreme Court was the ultimate forum of justice therefore, the scope of review could not be limited.
In response, the CJP asked as per the 150 years of judicial precedents, there was a difference between the scope of review and appeal. He lamented that the ECP lawyer did not reply to this question yesterday (Tuesday).
At one point, Justice Akhtar remarked that the rules of the top court would become ineffective if the ECP’s arguments regarding the jurisdiction of a review and appeal were accepted. He said expanding the scope would reopen cases dating back several years.
In reply, Mr Swati said the time for filing a review should not be limited. Justice Akhtar said it was the first time in 70 years that this point had been raised, asking him to give a solution. The ECP lawyer said the constitutional provision of reviewing rules could not be interrupted.
Adding to the point, Justice Ahsan said the scope of the review was clearly mentioned in the rules of the apex court.
At one point, CJP Bandial observed that the use of Article 184(3) had increased. “We have realised that this can lead to mistakes.”
Later, the chief justice asked the ECP lawyer to submit arguments on the actual case and adjourned the hearing till Thursday.
Previous Hearing
During Tuesday’s hearing, Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial remarked he was pleased to see the change in stance of the government and the ECP on April 4 decision regarding holding of elections in Punjab as in the past they demanded formation of the full bench to hear the case.
At the outset of the hearing, ECP lawyer Sajeel Swati told the bench that the federal and Punjab governments had submitted their response but he had just received their copies.
The ECP counsel pleaded the court to grant him time to review the replies submitted by the governments. The chief justice asked him to submit arguments regarding his review petition as the court could raise a new point if it was needed.
Subsequently, Swati presented his arguments, contending the jurisdiction of ECP’s review petition was not limited to constitutional cases. He added that powers of the apex court could be increased but not reduced. He added the jurisdiction of the top court was limited to civil and criminal cases when it comes to cases related to reviews.
At this, Justice Ahsan remarked that the cases related to fundamental rights were treated as civilian. However, the ECP lawyer argued that the proceedings carried out under Article 184(3) could not regarded as a civilian case. The judge replied Article 184(3) was related to both public interest and fundamental rights.
At one point, Justice Munib inquired if it would be a civilian case if the elections case came to the Supreme Court from the high court. At which, Mr Swati argued that the high court had greater constitutional authority than the top court.
When Justice Munib Akhtar asked whether a review under 184(3) should be regarded as an appeal, the ECP lawyer replied in the affirmative, adding that the scope of review under Article 184 (3) was not limited.
Justice Ahsan responded that the constitution differentiated between the scope of the right to appeal and review.
Justice Munib remarked that accepting the ECP’s review petition would increase complications.
When the ECP lawyer insisted on right to appeal, the chief justice intervened and remarked the Article 184(3) of the Constitution did not give the right to appeal.
The ECP lawyer then asked the court to issue a detailed order in order to make things easier. Later, the hearing was adjourned till 12pm tomorrow (Wednesday).
PTI Submits Reply
During the hearing, the PTI submitted its reply and pleaded the apex court to reject the review petition filed by the electoral body. It argued that the commission had raised new points in its review petition whereas it was not allowed in it.
It maintained that the apex court had not given a date for elections in Punjab as it had only fixed 90 deadline, adding that President Arif Alvi had given April 30 as date for elections but it was changed by the ECP.
The PTI said the apex court invalidated the ECP decision on April 30, adding that the SC had authority to review the functions of the electoral body.
Background
The top court on April 4, had ordered to hold Punjab provincial assembly election on May 14. It had also directed the federal government to provide Rs21 billion for the elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa by April 10 and make available all the necessary personnel, whether from the Armed Forces, Rangers, or the Frontier Constabulary for the security and other purposes related to the general elections.
The court also ordered the electoral watchdog to present a report on the provision of funds on April 11. It came as Imran Khan-led party had filed the petition regarding delay in elections after the ECP on March 22 put off the polls till Oct 8, citing financial and security constraints.
Later, the federal government, in response, took the matter to the parliament to get the funding approved. Finance Minister Ishaq Dar presented the election expenses bill in the National Assembly.
The ECP, on April 11, apprised the SC in a report that the government had not provided funds to the commission for holding elections in Punjab.
According to the Election Commission, the government had not yet provided Rs21bn despite the SC's order and the Punjab caretaker government had agreed to provide only 75,000 personnel for security. "There is a shortage of 300,000 security personnel for the elections in Punjab," the ECP noted.
Upon this, the court issued notices to top officials including Attorney General Mansoor Awan, State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) Governor Jameel Ahmad, Secretary of the Finance Department, and Secretary of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) over failing to provide funds for upcoming Punjab elections.
Later, the PTI and the PDM-led government sat on the negotiating table, starting on April 27, to talk through elections but it culminated in consensus on holding elections simultaneously across the country with an impasse on the date during its third and last round on May 2.
On May 3, the ECP approached the court seeking review of its order to hold polls on May 14. Three days later, CJP Bandial said the apex court would proceed in line with the constitution and would not sit idle on the May 14 election issue if the dialogue between the government and the PTI failed.
