Islamabad: (Staff Reporter) Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial has questioned that whether the Election Commission has the authority to extend the date of elections. The CJP raised the question when the hearing of PTI’s petition against postponement of Punjab and KP elections resumed.
According to the source, at the outset of the hearing, CJP Bandial welcomed newly appointed Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan. The CJP remarked that the court did not want to drag the matter. The question in front of the court was simple: Can the date for elections be extended or not? “If the ECP has the authority to extend the date then the matter will be over,” he said.
As per details Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, who is a member of the bench, questioned can the assemblies be dissolved on the whim of one man, adding that elections in the country would be held anyway but the question was who had the authority to extend them beyond 90 days.
Furthermore the CJP Bandial noted that the AGP had raised the point to make political parties respondents in the case. “Rule of law is essential for democracy and without rule of law, a democracy cannot function. “If the political temperature stays so high, problems will increase,” the apex judge added.
Moreover PPP lawyer Farooq H. Naek said that there was “anarchy and fascism” in the country today. He sought time for preparation but the CJP said you are a senior lawyer and aware of all the facts. He said that the legal issue cannot be resolved in a vacuum. There is a need for discipline in society and political leadership, the CJP observed. Naek said that the Constitution is a living document. Interpretation can only be based on the ground realities. What is good for democracy and the country in the current situation has to be determined. He submitted that political parties were stakeholders, they must be heard. Justice Jamal Mandokhel asked why this question is not raised in parliament, to which Naek said that it is being under consideration.
Meanwhile the AGP referred to the dissenting note of two judges, on which the CJP remarked that at this time the question is not about the decision but about the authority of the ECP. The AGP submitted that there was a question of violation of the court order. If there is no order, referring to the 4-3 verdict of the Supreme Court, he added that then there is no question of violation of the verdict. It there is no court order, then the President cannot even give the date. The issue of the court’s March 1 order should be fixed first. In the present case, the plea is about the execution of the judgment.
As per details the CJP remarked that the members of the bench are sitting to examine the question raised in the petition, your reliance is on a technical point. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is not restricted to the petition. At present, the question is not about giving a date rather it is about cancellation of the date. Elections are vital for democracy, he added.
Furthermore CJP Bandial said that it is to be determined whether the given date is legal or not. Is the ECP or anyone else holds authority to dictate to dissolve assembly or not? Objecting to the arguments of the AGP, he said that the decision of two judges is not relevant to this case; this question can be reviewed later. The matter in hand is of vital importance, don’t divert attention from it.
