ISLAMABAD: After much consideration, the Supreme Court of Pakistan on Monday lifted the lifetime disqualification of parliamentarians, recalling its earlier judgment that barred politicians from ever standing for office, bolstering expectations for political heavyweights planning to compete in the February 8 elections.
The Supreme Court ruled that no one can be prevented from running in elections for life if they are disqualified under Article 62 (1)(f), overturning its landmark decision in the Samiullah Baloch case.
The hearings of the case were conducted by a seven-member larger bench led by CJP Qazi Faez Isa and consisting of Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, and Justice Musarrat Hilali.
The result was issued with a 6-1 majority after Justice Yahya Afridi disagreed with his colleagues and backed the apex court’s prior decision.
The legal quandary occurred after the parliament amended the Elections Act 2017, limiting a politician’s disqualification period to five years rather than a lifetime, in contrast to the Supreme Court’s judgment, which interpreted disqualification under Article 62(1)(f) to be “permanent.”
After being disqualified for life, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) supremo Nawaz Sharif and Istehkam-e-Pakistan Party (IPP) president Jahangir Tareen can now run for office.
The chief justice stated that since the election calendar had been established, it was “necessary” to release the order as soon as possible.
Also read: Mushaal blasts Modi govt for subjecting Kashmiris to collective punishment like Gazans
During the previous session, the chief justice stated that removing anyone from life in parliament was “against Islam,” citing a scripture from Surah Sajdah that explains that people are not bad, but their actions are.
Senior anchorperson Shahzeb Khanzada and President of the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (Pildat) Ahmed Bilal Mehboob told Geo News that the order “arrived at the right time.”
The Supreme Court stated in its written ruling that Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is not self-executive because it does not define a time of disqualification.
“There is no law that provides for the procedure, process, and the identification of the court of law for making the declaration mentioned in Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution and the duration of such a declaration, for the purpose of disqualification thereunder, to meet the requirements of the Fundamental Right to a fair trial and due process guaranteed by Article 10A of the Constitution.”
The order stated that the interpretation of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution in imposing a lifetime disqualification on a person through an implied declaration of a court of civil jurisdiction while adjudicating on some civil rights and obligations of the parties goes beyond the scope of the said Article and amounts to reading into the Constitution.
The mentioned reading of the Constitution is also contrary to the principle of harmonious interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution, as it limits citizens’ fundamental right to contest elections and vote for a candidate of their choice, as enshrined in the Constitution, in the absence of reasonable restrictions imposed by law.
“Until a law is enacted to make its provisions executory, Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution stands on a similar footing as Article 62(1)(d), (e), and (g), and serves as a guideline for the voters in exercising their right to vote,” the ruling said.
“The view taken in Samiullah Baloch case, treating the declaration made by a court of civil jurisdiction regarding breach of certain civil rights and obligations as a declaration mentioned in Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution and making such declaration to have a lifelong disqualifying effect amounts to reading into the Constitution and is therefore overruled.”
The order further stated that there “remains no need to examine its validity and scope in the present case” because Section 232(2), which was added to the Elections Act, 2017, on June 26, 2023, stipulates a five-year period for the disqualification incurred by any judgment, order, or decree in accordance with Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.
Justice Afridi, however, disagreed with his colleagues, stating that the extent of a member of parliament’s lack of qualification as defined by Article 62(1)(f) is neither permanent nor lifelong, and it will only be effective for the duration that the court’s declaration to that effect is in effect.Consequently, the judgment reached by this Court in Sami Ullah Baloch v. Abdul Karim.
