Speaker’s ruling case: SC larger bench adjourns hearing till Tuesday

Islamabad (HRNW) Supreme Court adjourned the hearing of the case against the ruling of the National Assembly speaker till Tuesday.

A five-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial is hearing the case. Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan, Justice Jamal Mandokhel, Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel will be the part of the bench.

The hearing resumed Monday at 1pm.

During the hearing on Monday, chief justice said that the court has to see the constitutional status of whatever had happened in the assembly.

Chief justice said that the court has to see the constitutional status of whatever had transpired in the assembly.

The court will issue an order today, said chief justice.

It rejected the Pakistan Peoples Party’s request for full court reference.

CJ Bandial said that if you have any objection to the bench, we can leave. Constituting a full bench impacts the hearing of other cases, he said. Last year, 10,000 pending cases were increased due to full court references, he added.

Farooq Naek, who is representing PPP, said full courts are constituted on sensitive matters.

Let the court decide which question is important, chief justice replied.

Naek said that the speaker was bound to call the session within 14 days. The session was called in March 27. To this Justice Muneeb said that your case is not about timing of the session.

PPP’s counsel said that it is a political parties’ right to move no-confidence motion and there is no need to give reasons for the resolution.

Justice Muneeb asked what would have happened if the speaker had not allowed parties to move no-confidence motion.

Before voting, debate on no-confidence takes place, said CJ Bandial. Debate on no-confidence was not allowed, Naek replied.

Neither the debate took place nor the voting and the speakers issued the ruling, Naek said.

Chief justice said if the debate was allowed on April 3, voting could have taken place on April 4. To this, Naek said that April 3 session was called for voting.

Justice Jamal Mandokhel said that the article 95 only talks about voting not debate.

Farooq Naek said that debate could have been allowed on Fawad Chaudhry’s point of order. Speaker knew what he was doing was unconstitutional that’s why he was not present, he said.

Under what rule speaker issued the ruling, Justice Muneeb asked.

Deputy speaker issued the ruling on Fawad Chaudhry’s point of order, the PPP lawyer said.

He presented deputy speaker’s ruling in the court.

Naek said the opposition was not heard before the ruling was passed. All the opposition members were accused of treason, he said.

PPP’s counsel said all eyes are on the Supreme Court and the hearing should be completed today.

Justice Ijaz said the verdict of the case will have long lasting impact, so it is necessary to hear all the parties.

It won’t be possible to pass a judgment today, said Justice Ijaz. We heard you for two hours, all the lawyers combined could have completed arguments in two hour, said CJ Bandial.