Nawaz-specific law: pro-judiciary stance of opposition parties legislators and experts isolate PML-N

Legislators belonging to the Opposition parties and senior legal experts tilt in favour of judiciary on the person-specific legislation aimed at defending Nawaz Sharif despite having been disqualified. Business Recorder inferred from background interviews with the Parliamentarians and senior legal experts that legislatures are focused on the letter while the judiciary is focusing on the spirit of the Constitution.
Seasoned constitutional experts argued, to safeguard the spirit of the Constitution is the domain of the judiciary. They say a law that maybe violative of the spirit of the constitution can be passed but the same can and should be struck down by the judiciary.
Talking to Business Recorder, noted lawyer and constitutional expert Wasim Sajjad said that two-thirds of parliamentarians can amend the constitution which is supreme.
"It is the parliament which makes the constitution and again it is the parliament which can amend the constitution, so ultimately it is two-third majority, which I think, is supreme," he contended.
Citing the example of UK, which has no written constitution, he said in a country such as Britain, parliament is all in all, but in a country like Pakistan which has a written constitution, such controversies, often surface.
"In our constitution, it is clearly written that sovereignty belongs to Allah only, and in my opinion, two-thirds majority in parliament can amend the constitution," he said.
Abdul Latif Yousafzai, a senior Supreme Court lawyer, who had also served as Advocate General Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, concurred, and referred that it is the constitution which empowers the judiciary to interpret the constitution.
"Given the formation of our parliament where majority of the lawmakers have vested interests and specific legislations revolve around individuals, vested interests and business interests of wealthy feudal, the judiciary acts as a counterbalancing force," he said.
Yousafzai pointed out that the recent legislation that paved the way for reelection of disqualified Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif as party president is a person-specific legislation which the judiciary struck down as it is only institution with the power to interpret whether the legislation was against the spirit of the constitution. He said the judiciary has the constitutional right to interpret any law enacted by parliament. He said, to say that we parliamentarians are supreme and none can touch us, it is not practiced anywhere in the world.
Opposition Leader in the National Assembly Khursheed Shah agreed with this notion, saying a person-specific legislation under the pretext of two-thirds majority is against the spirit of the constitution.
"The parliament has the right to legislate but person-specific legislation is detrimental to this supreme institution," he contended.
Shah said judiciary has the right to interpret law adopted by the parliament. He asserted PPP always fight for the supremacy of parliament but legislation should be in the national interest.
"There are no two opinions that parliament has the right to legislate but the elected representatives themselves have degraded and weakened parliament," he lamented.
Senator Taj Haider, PPP's parliamentary group leader in Senate said his party strongly opposed the legislation in Senate proposed by PML-N for reelecting disqualified Prime Minister Nawaz as party head because there are corruption charges against him and in such a situation, making a person-specific legislation, is against the spirit of the constitution.
"It is the right of the Supreme Court to interpret any law and strike it down if it feels that it is contrary to the spirit of the constitution," he maintained.
However, a senior PML-N leader Mian Abdul Mannan defended the stance of his party, saying any legislation which PML-N intends to introduce or has done in the past has not been a violation of any basic human rights.
"We legislated to reelect a popular leader [Nawaz Sharif] as head of our which the people of Pakistan want. There was no violation of fundamental human rights as we only wanted our popular leader to lead his people," he said.
In an obvious reference to former military dictator General Pervez Musharraf (retd), he said, a man who is facing court case under Article 6-A of the constitution is roaming around freely, but the noose is being tightened around a politician that is not fair.