BR100 Decreased By (-0.47%)
BR30 Increased By (0.65%)
KSE100 Decreased By (-0.06%)
KSE30 Decreased By (-0.51%)
AGHA 7.75 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.13%)
BECO 5.25 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.76%)
BML 60.12 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (0.18%)
BOP 35.35 Decreased By ▼ -1.11 (-3.04%)
CNERGY 13.00 Increased By ▲ 1.06 (8.88%)
CSIL 6.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.32%)
FCCL 57.80 Increased By ▲ 0.44 (0.77%)
FFL 16.45 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-0.78%)
FNEL 1.21 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.83%)
KEL 7.39 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.96%)
KOSM 6.04 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.17%)
LOTCHEM 27.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.11%)
MLCF 103.41 Increased By ▲ 1.34 (1.31%)
NBP 205.25 Decreased By ▼ -1.10 (-0.53%)
NCPL 61.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.92 (-1.47%)
NPL 71.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.88 (-1.22%)
OGDC 322.65 Increased By ▲ 3.46 (1.08%)
PACE 11.73 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (3.08%)
PAEL 43.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.38 (-0.87%)
PIBTL 16.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.59%)
PPL 226.80 Increased By ▲ 5.25 (2.37%)
PRL 67.52 Increased By ▲ 3.77 (5.91%)
PTC 72.16 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.35%)
SSGC 27.12 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-0.59%)
TBL 9.90 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.41%)
TELE 8.70 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.93%)
TPL 21.70 Increased By ▲ 1.02 (4.93%)
TPLP 15.47 Increased By ▲ 0.49 (3.27%)
TREET 24.20 Increased By ▲ 0.10 (0.41%)
TRG 61.59 Decreased By ▼ -1.70 (-2.69%)

LAHORE: Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Attaullah Tarar said that two honourable judges of the Supreme Court had raised important points in their dissenting notes regarding reserved seats.

Addressing a press conference here, he said that on the issue of reserved seat, a party was provided relief which was not a petitioner. He said that two honourable judges of the Supreme Court, Justice Aminuddin Khan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, have issued detailed dissenting notes and it said that after the passage of 15 days a detailed verdict of the case had not come.

He said, “Usually a detailed verdict comes within 15 days after a decision is announced.”

PML-N files review petition in SC against reserved seats verdict

Attaullah Tarar said that some articles of the Constitution were related to reserved seats, adding that in the reserved seats case, a decision had been given not in line with these articles.

He further said that it was also mentioned in the dissenting note of two honourable judges of the Supreme Court that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf had not been a party to this case and to provide it a relief the court had to travel beyond the jurisdiction conferred by Articles 175 and 185 of the Constitution and would also have to suspend Article 51, 63, 106 of the Constitution.

The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf was not a petitioner but their 81 members had been provided relief, he said and added that those who had come after being elected on reserved seats and taken oaths of their membership were removed.

He said that it was a reality that if members of Sunni Ittehad Council would sit with Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf then this would be violation of Article 62(1) (f). He said that the two honourable judges in their dissenting note said that it was a proved reality that Sunni Ittehad Council had not taken part in general elections as a political party while the chairman of Sunni Ittehad Council had also contested election in an independent capacity. A party which has no existence in the parliament how it could be given reserved seats, he questioned.

Attaullah Tarar said that it was mentioned in the Constitution of Sunni Ittehad Council that no minority member could join it, so it could not get minority seats as well.

The Information minister said that a due procedure was followed for electing members on reserved seats.

He further said that PML-N and PPP had filed a review petition on the Supreme Court’s reserved seats verdict but it had not been fixed for hearing till now.

He said that two honourable judges of the Supreme Court had raised constitutional and legal points in their dissenting note and added that these points were a big question mark on the legal framework and needed to be answered.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed for this article.

Jay Aug 05, 2024 09:32am
This is a non-binding dissenting note and not a decision. Detailed majority decision of SC is still awaited, which is binding and any deviation from that decision will lead to contempt of court.
0
KU Aug 05, 2024 12:04pm
''Common sense is not a gift, it’s a punishment. Because you have to deal with everyone who doesn’t have it.''
0