The Supreme Court on Tuesday, in its decision on a presidential reference seeking interpretation of Article 63-A of the Constitution, said the votes of defecting lawmakers will not be counted.
Article 63-A seeks to restrict lawmakers from voting (or abstaining) in violation of party instructions “in relation to election of the prime minister or chief minister; or a vote of confidence or a vote of no-confidence; or a money bill or a Constitution (amendment) bill”. In its interpretation of this article, the apex court said votes cast against party direction “cannot be counted and must be disregarded, and this is so regardless of whether the party head, subsequent to such vote, proceeds to take, or refrains from taking, action that would result in a declaration of defection”. This opinion of the apex court raises some pertinent questions with respect to the election of the Punjab chief minister, which resulted in PML-N’s Hamza Shehbaz becoming the provincial chief executive.
That is because contrary to what happened in the National Assembly, the votes of 25 dissident PTI lawmakers were instrumental in helping Hamza get over the line; he received a total of 197 votes while 186 votes are required for a simple majority. If the 25 votes by PTI lawmakers are removed from his tally, he would lose his majority.
So, what does today’s SC verdict mean for the future of Hamza Shehbaz’s government in Punjab? Dawn.com talked to some legal experts to answer this question.
‘Depends on ECP verdict’
Barrister Asad Rahim, who assisted the federation in the case, said the current decision was directly connected to what the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) would decide with regards to Punjab’s dissidents, which is “the first factual hurdle”.
“If the ECP decides they have defected, contrary to the direction of the parliamentary party, the Supreme Court judgment will apply, and the election of the chief minister will be set aside.” However, Rahim added, that this could only happen once “the question of whether the opinion is to be applied retrospectively” had been decided. He also said that in future, in cases of defection, the speaker would simply not count dissenting votes. A retrospective application would mean that today’s judgment could be applied to past events, such as the April 16 election of the Punjab chief minister.
Lawyer Abdul Moiz Jaferii had a similar opinion. He said the PTI could take the validity of the CM election to court “but it would first need to be seen what the ECP based its decision on”.
Earlier today, the ECP reserved its verdict on a reference seeking the disqualification of 25 dissident MPAs of the PTI, who had voted for PML-N’s Hamza Shehbaz in the election for the Punjab chief minister on April 16….
Source: dawn.com
