Article 63-A verdict aims to weaken no-trust motions: CJP Justice Naeem Afghan added to Article 63-A case bench

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa has raised concerns over the inconsistent interpretation of Article 63-A, which governs the disqualification of lawmakers, during a Supreme Court hearing on review petitions related to the disqualification of defecting members of the National Assembly. The chief justice called for adherence to the constitution’s text, emphasising the need for clarity in the application of the law. Presiding over a five-member bench, Chief Justice Isa questioned the contradiction in rulings that suggest a lawmaker should be de-seated upon defection while also leaving it to Parliament to decide the duration of the disqualification. “If the constitution clearly states that a disqualified member will be de-seated, then that is the action that must be followed,” Isa said, highlighting that there should be no ambiguity in implementing the constitution’s provisions. The case revolves around Article 63-A, which deals with the disqualification of members of Parliament for defying party directions during critical votes. The Supreme Court is reviewing its earlier decision in the case, which ruled that the votes cast by dissident lawmakers would not be counted, and left it to Parliament to legislate on the duration of their disqualification. During the hearing, Chief Justice Isa pointed out a significant contradiction in the previous ruling. He remarked that the decision to de-seat a lawmaker for defying party directions should be straightforward, but the involvement of Parliament in determining the disqualification period adds complexity. He questioned how the decision-making process could be left to both the judiciary and Parliament, calling it a “clear contradiction.”“On one hand, the ruling states that a defecting member should be de-seated, but on the other hand, it allows Parliament to decide the length of disqualification. Meanwhile, a meeting of the Supreme Court’s Practice and Procedure Judges Committee ran into a hurdle on Tuesday after Justice Mansoor Ali Shah did not attend. Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Aminuddin Khan waited for the senior pusine judge for a siginificant time. The committee had met to reconstitute a bench to hear the appeals against Article 63-A of the constitution. CJP Isa proposed Justice Mansoor Ali Shah’s name for the bench in place of Justice Munib Akhtar, who had announced that he would not sit on the bench. However, since Justice Mansoor did not attend the meeting, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan was added to the bench. CJP Isa then recounted the whole matter from Justice Mnuib’s refusal, to a new committee meeting where the decision to add Justice Afghan to the bench was taken. Justice Isa said that he was left with no choice but to nominate the new judge. He also said that what was happening in the court was open to the entire world and was not happening behind closed doors. He also added that the minutes of the meeting where the decision had been taken had been uploaded on the SC website.