Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial on Tuesday proposed a pay cut for himself and other judges so that the “vital task” of holding elections across the country could be funded and completed.
The CJP passed the remark after the Supreme Court resumed the hearing on Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s (PTI) petition challenging the ECP decision on the Punjab elections.
Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial said the decision to postpone polls in Punjab was penned in haste by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).
During the hearing, Justice Jamal Mandokhail asked the ECP what would become of the date for the election if its decision for delaying the vote was revoked. He lamented that no one cared about the Constitution in Pakistan anymore but elections must be held under any circumstances. “The question is, who has the authority to extend the duration of 90 days and if the assembly should be dissolved at a single person’s behest,” the justice added.
The CJP remarked that the court does not want to drag this matter. He said that ECP’s jurisdiction as per yesterday’s order will be seen by the court, while the request of the ruling coalition parties to become a party in the case will be looked into later. “Rule of law and democracy are two sides of a same coin. There should be mutual tolerance, patience and law and order” CJP Bandial observed. Meanwhile, Naek interjected and told the bench that they were also stakeholders in the case.
At this, the CJP assured the senior lawyer that no one denied Naek’s importance but he believed that they shouldn’t engage in a legal controversy. The coalition parties – PML-N, PPP and JUI-F – submitted a request in the court to become respondents in the case. During the proceedings, PTI lawyer Barrister Ali Zafar, Attorney General of Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan, PPP lawyer Farooq H. Naek and others were present. At the outset of the hearing today, CJP Bandial welcomed AGP Awan and said that the court looked forward to receiving assistance for him. The top judge remarked that “we don’t want to stretch the matter”, stating that the question in front of the court was simple: Can the election date be extended or not? “If the ECP has the authority [to extend the date] then the matter will be over,” he said.
CJP Bandial noted that the AGP had raised the point to make political parties respondents in the case. “Rule of law is essential for democracy and without rule of law, a democracy cannot function. “If the political temperature stays so high, problems will increase,” the apex court judge added. Here, PPP lawyer Farooq H. Naek said that there was “anarchy and fascism” in the country today.Meanwhile, the attorney general mentioned the dissenting notes of two SC judges. However, CJP Bandial said: “The question here is not about the judgement but about the ECP’s power.” The AGP contended that the PTI petition was based on the ECP’s violation of the SC orders. “The members of the bench are sitting here to review the questions raised in the petition. You [AGP Awan] are relying on a technical point,” the top judge said, adding that the SC’s jurisdiction was not limited to the petition.
Right now, he continued, the matter is not about giving the poll date but delaying it. “Elections are necessary for democracy … don’t spoil the matter on technical grounds,” the CJP told Awan. “The SC’s March 1 order has already been implemented. Don’t raise this matter or present it in court again.” Justice Manokhail pointed out that “the number of judges [who issued] the March 1 judgement is Supreme Court’s internal matter”.
He then inquired whether holding elections within the stipulated time of 90 days was not a constitutional requirement. “Can the ECP delay the date for polls?” At that, the CJP thanked Justice Mandokhail for “clearing the matter”. “People across the country are standing in queues for subsidised wheat today … it is the responsibility of the PTI and government to improve the situation in the country,” he said, stressing that it was important to respect all of the national institutions. “But every institution has to work within its constitutional limits,” Barrister Zafar stated here to which the CJP said that the same was expected from the PTI leadership as well.
“PTI has to take the initiative first because it has approached the court,” the top judge said. “There is violence and intolerance in the country today … look at the economic situation … people are waiting in long lines for subsidised wheat. “Instead of quarrelling among each other, think of these people,” CJP Bandial urged. For his part, Barrister Zafar said that the crises would escalate if the elections were delayed. Meanwhile, Justice Aminuddin Khan inquired whether the election schedule could be further reduced from the mandated 90-day period to which Justice Ahsan responded that the ECP had the authority to adjust the election schedule within the 90-day period.
However, he said the ECP could not delay the polls beyond the specified period. Meanwhile, Justice Mandokhail observed that the date given by the ECP was already beyond the stipulated period of 90 days and asked whether this was acceptable. He suggested that the court could intervene and issue a verdict if elections were not held within the 90-day period. Justice Akhtar remarked that the ECP should have approached the court if elections were not possible. “[The court] can be approached for elections on the same day if an assembly has been dissolved during the schedule of another assembly.” The ECP, he continued, cannot issue an order itself. “If the election commission can delay elections for six months it can do the same for two years too.” Justice Mandokhail noted here that the Constitution was silent when it came to deciding who had the authority to delay the polls. “Should the parliament not amend the Constitution,” he asked rhetorically to which Justice Akhtar said that if the parliament brought amendments everything would be sorted. “But the question is what will happen to the elections that are to be held until the amendment is made,” he wondered. Here, Barrister Zafar said that from the basis of the reasons why the elections were delayed, it seemed that election would never be held.
“If the problem is related to funds, then how will the caretaker government issue them?” Justice Akhtar asked. Justice Ahsan also questioned how could it be determined that the problems that existed today would not be there on October 8 as well. The PTI lawyer replied that the ECP had said that it was not provided with funds for the elections to which Justice Akhtar stated that he had read a statement given by the prime minister in newspapers. “The federal government says that Rs500 billion tax was collected till February it is surprising that out of Rs500 billion, Rs20 billion couldn’t be given [for elections],” the judge pointed out. At one point, Justice Mandokhail asked if funds were allotted for elections in the budget, saying that the procedure of taking funds was clearly mentioned in the Constitution. For his part, Barrister Zafar mentioned that last year the CEC had said the ECP would be ready for elections in November 2022. “But now, the ECP all of a sudden says that it does not have funds the unavailability of funds is no excuse for delaying elections.”
