“Was Zia ul Haq above everyone and all his sins are forgiven?”, the CJP remarked.
Lifetime disqualification case adjourned till Jan4. Supreme Court of Pakistan has adjourned the lifetime disqualification case till Thursday(January 4).
The Supreme Court was hearing a case related to the issue of lifetime disqualification of the parliamentarians on Tuesday.
A seven-member larger bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Qazi Faez Isa, and comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Musrat Hilali is hearing the case.
At the outset of the hearing the proceedings of which were broadcast live on apex court’s website, Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan appeared in the court and said that he was supporting the legislation to make the penalty of disqualification five years under Article 62(1)(f).
The Attorney General said that Nawaz Sharif’s lifetime disqualification decision should be reconsidered. He requested a re-examination of the decision on the interpretation of lifetime disqualification under Article 62 (1)(f).
The Chief Justice inquired, “Attorney General! What is your position that the Election Act should be followed or the decisions of the Supreme Court?”, to which the Attorney General replied that the court is requested to review the decision of lifetime disqualification. He said he would support the Election Act as it is a federal law.
During the hearing, Saqib Jilani, the lawyer of the petitioner against Mir Badshah Qaisrani, also opposed the lifetime disqualification. The lawyer said that he filed the application in 2018 when the decision of lifetime disqualification came under 62(1)(f). He said Section 232 has now been added to the Election Act, so he is not following the plea to the extent of lifelong disqualification.
On the other hand, the chief justice wondered how anyone could determine the character of other based upon the criteria set in said article of the Constitution, as he raised questions about the terms “Sadiq” [truthful] and “Ameen” [honest].
No one other than Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) could use the title of Sadiq and Ameen, he said and remarked that even Quaid-e-Azam would have been disqualified if the standards were applied to him.
In similar remarks, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah questioned how a court could give a declaration about character of an individual.
According to Chief Justice Isa, the two terms are creating confusion because of their ambiguous nature and the inability at practical level to implement the same, while no one can attain the highest level of character as per the standards set by Islamic principles. Moreover, the same ideals aren’t applied to people other than the parliamentarians.
He also observed that they could accept the amendment to Election Act because no one had challenged the same – an argument not seconded by the attorney general who was of the opinion that it might create an impression of overwriting the Supreme Court verdict through legislation.
More From FactFile: Gen Asim Munir vows to eliminate mafias with ‘nation’s support’
“Was Zia ul Haq above everyone and all his sins are forgiven? Was Zia ul Haq of good conduct?”, the CJP remarked.
He said every institution should work under their ambit.
It may be noted that the Supreme Court had taken notice of the inconsistency between the court decision and the Election Act, after which the case was scheduled for hearing today and a public advertisement was also issued in newspapers about the case.
