Connect with us

Pakistan

Article 62(1)(f) imposing lifetime ban is a draconian law: CJP Bandial

Published

2 years ago

on

  • Supreme Court hears Faisal Vawda’s lifetime disqualification case.
  • CJ says ECP has authority to probe false affidavits.
  • ECP has properly examined facts in Faisal Vawda case, says SC.

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial Tuesday termed Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution that imposes a lifetime ban of politicians a “draconian” law.

The chief justice made these remarks while a hearing a petition filed by PTI leader Faisal Vawda against his lifetime disqualification in a case pertaining to the submission of a false affidavit about his US nationality.

A three-member bench of the apex court headed by CJ Umer Ata Bandial heard the case today.

“Article 62 (1)(f) is a draconian law and we will hear this case with caution and in detail,” the CJP said.

PTI’s Faisal Vawda filed a petition in the top court in February under Article 185(3) of the Constitution for leave to appeal against the order of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) dated February 9 and the February 16 Islamabad High Court judgment.

Vawda had contended that the ECP order and the IHC judgment are arbitrary and without lawful authority and of no legal effect, adding that it is also contrary to the judgements of the apex court.

He prayed to the court to set aside the order of the ECP and the IHC.

In the appeal, the PTI leader pleaded that the ECP had cited no reason for invoking Article 62(1)(f) to disqualify him for life. The electoral body, it added, appears to be under an impression that any person disqualified under Article 63(1)(c) — for having dual nationality — could automatically be penalised under Article 62(1)(f).

When the SC bench took up the case today, Vawda’s counsel Waseem Sajjad said that his client contested polls in 2018 and after two years a petition was filed in the high court seeking his disqualification.

At this, the CJP said that the ECP has the authority to investigate a false affidavit submission, adding that even if the Supreme Court revokes the order, the facts would remain the same.

“The Election Commission has properly examined the facts in Faisal Vawda’s case, the only question here is whether the ECP can order disqualification for life or not.”

Later, the hearing was adjourned till October 6.

It is important to note that the apex court in April 2018 declared that the disqualification under 62(1)(f) would be for life.

Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and Jahangir Tarin both are disqualified for life under the said article.

What is Article 62 (1) (f)?

Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution pertains to the qualification of members of Parliament and pertains to the terms ‘Sadiq’ and ‘Ameen’. However, it does not set a time limit for the duration of disqualification.

The article is stated below:

“A person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) unless-

he is a citizen of Pakistan;

he is, in the case of the National Assembly, not less than twenty -five years of age and is enroled as a voter in any electoral roll in-

any part of Pakistan, for election to a general seat or a seat reserved for non-Muslims; and

any area in a Province from which she seeks membership for election to a seat reserved for women.

he is, in the case of Senate, not less than thirty years of age and is enrolled as a voter in any area in a Province or, as the case may be, the Federal Capital or the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, from where he seeks membership;

he is of good character and is not commonly known as one who violates Islamic Injunctions;

he has adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and practises obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstains from major sins ;

he is sagacious, righteous and non-profligate, honest and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law;

he has not, after the establishment of Pakistan, worked against the integrity of the country or opposed the ideology of Pakistan.

The disqualifications specified in paragraphs (d) and (e) shall not apply to a person who is a non-Muslim, but such a person shall have good moral reputation.”

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest News

PM Shehbaz will meet with Saudi ministers and speak at the WEF special session today.

Published

5 hours ago

on

By

On the third day of his visit to the Kingdom, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif will speak at the World Economic Forum Special Meeting’s final plenary, which is titled “Rejuvenating Growth.”

Other speakers at the concluding plenary, in addition to the prime minister, are Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Economy and Planning Faisal Alibrahim, British Secretary of State David Cameron, WEF Geneva President Brørge Brende, and WEF Head of Middle East and North Africa Maroun Kairouz.

Meetings with Saudi ministers of trade, energy, the environment, and agriculture are also scheduled for the third day of the prime minister’s visit. He will probably also meet with his counterpart from Malaysia.

Mohammed bin Salman, the prime minister and crown prince of Saudi Arabia, will be present at the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Special Meeting on Global Collaboration, Growth, and Energy for Development, which gets underway here today.

Continue Reading

Latest News

The nomination of Ishaq Dar as deputy prime minister raises concerns.

Published

5 hours ago

on

By

A lot of doubts have been raised by Ishaq Dar, the foreign minister, being appointed deputy prime minister.

No reference to the Constitution, regulations, or any other law was mentioned in the Cabinet Division’s notification of the appointment.

What powers Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif used to designate Ishaq Dar as deputy prime minister has come under scrutiny in light of this.

There are questions about the legal foundation for the deputy prime minister’s nomination as it appears from the notification’s phrasing that rules for the position have not yet been established, according to insiders.

Likewise, the announcement is vague about the deputy prime minister’s proposed authority.

Deputy prime minister would be purely symbolic, according to government sources, and would not be authorized to carry out prime ministerial duties. In Pakistan, the deputy prime minister has previously been nominated.

The PPP administration appointed Chaudhry Parvez Elahi as deputy prime minister.

Observe that Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar was appointed deputy prime minister on Sunday with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s consent; the Cabinet Division formally announced the appointment.

Dar holds the position of Pakistan’s fourth deputy prime minister. Previous appointments to the position of deputy prime ministers included Parvez Elahi, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, and Begum Nusrat Bhutto.

Continue Reading

Latest News

Audio leaks case: FIA, PTA, and PEMRA pleas seeking Justice Sattar’s recusal dismissed

Published

5 hours ago

on

By

The Islamabad High Court fined each of the three government departments Rs. 500,000 on Monday after dismissing their arguments against a bench trial over audio leaks.

The court may also hold the heads of the aforementioned departments—the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA)—culpable for contempt.

In the audio leak case, four government agencies—the PEMRA, PTA, FIA, and Intelligence Bureau—filed separate petitions with the IHC, pleading for Justice Babar Sattar’s recusal and asking for the case to be heard by the same bench that has previously decided a case of a similar nature.

The petitioners contended that in order to prevent a different ruling, Justice Babar Sattar should recuse himself from the case that was decided in 2021. The petitions of Bushra Bibi, the wife of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf founder Imran Khan, and Najamul Saqib, the son of former chief justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar, should also be brought before the same bench.

During the current hearing, Justice Sattar also issued a summons to IB Joint Director General Tariq Mehmood, directing him to come before the court for the case’s subsequent hearing.

Following the issue’s discovery in 2023, the judge has been considering the aforementioned petitions.

The government agencies contended in the petitions in the case before Justice Sattar that Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani had already resolved an analogous issue in 2021. Thus, in order to prevent a conflicting ruling and for the sake of justice, they asked the judge to recuse herself from the case.

The departments are requesting that Justice Sattar recuse himself after six IHC judges—among them, himself—complained in writing to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) about intelligence agencies interfering with the court’s decision.

On March 25, the judges called for the calling of a judicial convention to address the issue of purported meddling by intelligence agents in the judicial activities or “intimidation” of judges in a way that jeopardised the judiciary’s independence.

Continue Reading

Trending