The Lahore High Court (LHC) Tuesday reserved its verdict on different petitions filed for holding election of the Punjab chief minister.
Chief Justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti reserved the verdict after hearing detailed arguments of the parties on petitions filed by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader Hamza Shehbaz and Deputy Speaker Punjab Assembly Dost Muhammad Mazari.
Hamza Shehbaz’s counsel Azam Nazir Tarar argued that the deputy speaker had taken charge of his office on the court directions. However, Barrister Ali Zafar on behalf of Speaker Punjab Assembly Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi argued that the court did not have powers to interfere in the assembly matters.
“Courts and assembly cannot interfere in each other’s work and if such an interference happened then a conflict will take place,” he added. He said if there was a constitutional requirement, then the court could hear the matter for its implementation only. He submitted that the provincial assembly was a constitutional body and it carried out legislation. He submitted that the matter did not fall under the jurisdiction of high court and no question could be raised in the court over step of the parliament under Article 69.
Ali Zafar submitted that as per rules of business, the court could not intervene in the matters of the assembly. He submitted that parliament and courts respect each other and did not intervene in each other’s domain.
He further argued that the petitioners had stated that assembly rules were not being implemented, which was a matter of the assembly.
If the speaker refuses to hold the election, then it would be a constitutional matter and the court has the jurisdiction to hear such a matter, he added. He submitted that fixing of date was not a constitutional matter, therefore, the court did not have the power to hear it.
At this stage, the chief justice observed that as per law, the election for the leader of house must be held as soon as possible and it was mandatory to complete nomination papers a day earlier for the purpose.
Ali Zafar replied that the election of chief minister would soon be held, adding that a three days time period would not make any difference. The rules would decide about the powers of speakers and their use, he added.
The chief justice questioned that the speaker was a candidate of chief minister-ship then why he withdrew powers of the deputy speaker.
PML-Q’s counsel Imtiaz Rasheed submitted that the speaker would not use powers on the day of election, adding that the court did not have powers to hear the matter. He submitted that the PML-N held a meeting outside the assembly and tried to form a government in the presence of one. However, the chief justice observed that no one could assume the office without taking oath.
Imtiaz Rasheed pleaded with the court to dismiss the petitions and issue directions for holding elections on April 16. At this, the chief justice questioned how the house would be conducted on April 16 or any other date. The speaker’s counsel argued that deputy speaker was an alternative to the speaker and if both were not present, then the house would be run by a panel.
