ISLAMBAD:
Attaullah Tarar, the Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting, has expressed concern regarding the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the allocation of reserved seats for the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).
During a public interview in Lahore, Tarar featured the disagreeing assessments of two Adjudicators for the nation’s highest court, Equity Aminuddin Khan and Equity Naeem Akhtar Afghan, which feel a little skeptical on the greater part decision.
Tarar asked, “Why have the remaining judges not released their written opinions yet?” in response to the Supreme Court’s delay in issuing a comprehensive written decision.
He mentioned that the dissenting judges had suggested that putting the decision into effect might necessitate suspending some of the constitution’s articles, which he thought was a bad idea.
The minister went into greater detail about the repercussions of the opposing notes and questioned the likelihood of “floor-crossing” in the event that members of the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) were to take seats in the PTI.
“Is this not an infringement of Articles 62 and 63?” Referring to the constitutional provisions that define the requirements for parliamentarians, Tarar asked.
He likewise communicated trepidation about the choice starting a trend for future political moves, where individuals could unreservedly switch party affiliations.
Tarar stated, “The dissenting notes have put a big question mark on the majority decision,” stressing the need for clarity regarding the judges’ constitutional and legal concerns.
To facilitate the decision, Tarar warned that suspending constitutional articles could undermine Pakistan’s legal framework. “It will damage the constitution and the rule of law if the impression of unilateral relief from the Supreme Court’s decision persists,” he argued, highlighting the potential legal and constitutional consequences.
The data serve required an intensive assessment of the contradicting judges’ interests, focusing on that an inability to resolve these issues could prompt sanctioned floor-crossing and successfully invalidate Articles 62 and 63. ” “To maintain the integrity of the constitution, the rule of law must be upheld, and any legal ambiguities must be resolved,” Tarar concluded.
