" NA Assembly, Punjab Assembly Ke Speaker Par Article 6 Lagna Chahiye," Hamid Khan

ARY NEWS

Transcript

00:00The speaker has written a letter to the Election Commission. What is the legal status of that letter?

00:06According to which the seats have been notified. The Punjab Assembly Speaker has written a letter.

00:11The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly Speaker has written a letter.

00:15What is the legal status of the letter from the Speaker Assembly?

00:19I think there is no such status.

00:24If it is contrary to the Supreme Court's decision, then there is no such status.

00:29According to me, the National Assembly Speaker and the Punjab Assembly Speaker

00:35both have insulted the court.

00:39Both have violated the court's decision.

00:45And I will think that by writing a letter against the court,

00:49they have committed high treason under Article 6.

00:53They have subverted the constitution.

00:56As an executive body, it was their duty to work in support of the Supreme Court.

01:01They have worked against the Supreme Court.

01:04This means that they have violated the constitution.

01:06But Mr. Amit, the judges in the Supreme Court,

01:09we have seen in many previous judgments,

01:11that even in those judgments, they talk about each other's character,

01:16each other's intentions, their political views.

01:20Even in today's judgment, we have seen that the two judges who have been accused of treason,

01:25when the judges of the Supreme Court attack each other in their dissenting or minority judgments,

01:33then the government gets an explanation.

01:35They say that when judges talk about this judgment,

01:39or talk about the political effects of this judgment,

01:42then our opinion is validated.

01:47Look, the thing is that there is always a difference in the courts.

01:52And sometimes judges give such and such an observation about each other.

01:58This has been happening in the history of the United States for two and a half, two hundred and forty years.

02:04Five to four judgments kept coming, six to three judgments kept coming.

02:08And those who were in the minority, they did not give any good observations about the majority.

02:15But this has nothing to do with its applicability.

02:20But Mr. Hamid, they did not even call each other politicians in robes.

02:24It has come to this point in the judgments that they have declared each other politicians in robes.

02:28Then the government takes advantage of it,

02:30that when they are implicating each other that this is politics,

02:34then they say that we will not implement it.

02:36These judges are giving testimonies against each other.

02:38No, this is not their job.

02:41They have to see what a majority says.

02:44We have to act on it.

02:46And the observations about each other are an academic thing.

02:50It has nothing to do with enforceability.

03:17What will happen now?

03:20I think they have no option.

03:23The Supreme Court has given a very clear clarification.

03:30After that, they have no legal or legal way to implement it.

03:36They will have to do it.

03:38Sir, are you thinking about a legal forum in the court against Tehreek-e-Insaaf Election Commission?

03:47Or are you thinking about any legal preparation for it?

03:54That is another thing.

03:56I am not going into that right now.

03:58What will a party think?

04:00Whether a reference should be sent against them in the Supreme Judicial Council or not?

04:05It is also possible that the Supreme Judicial Council has the power to remove the election commission.

04:15So, any case can be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council.

04:20And any complaint can be filed that they have committed a misconduct.

04:27So, in that case, the misconduct case can run.

04:31Should it run?

04:32What is your legal opinion?

04:35I think it should be done.

04:37Because they have committed so many misconducts over the years.

04:42Their chairman and members have committed all these misconducts.

04:50And filing a complaint against them or filing a reference will be justified in the Supreme Judicial Council.

05:01Do you think this is an insult to the court or the election commission?

05:09I think they should be given a chance to make a reference.

05:13That is the final step when there is no other way.

05:17Now that the clarification has come, they should make a reference within a reasonable time.

05:25Now that the detailed reasons have come, there is no doubt about it.

05:30Now there is no reason left for the election commission not to make a reference.

05:37The government is also considering legalization.

05:40It is also bringing an ordinance.

05:42Today, we have seen that the Minister of Law has categorically said that the parliament is supreme over the decisions of the Supreme Court.

05:48When there is a legalization, we see that there are changes in the practice and procedure of the committee.

05:55And then there is an action on it.

05:57Then there is a weight in their words that if the parliament will make a legalization, bring an ordinance and change the rules,

06:02then it is necessary to believe in the Supreme Court.

06:05Then the parliament became supreme.

06:08No, no, not at all supreme.

06:10Because every organ of state is supreme in its own area.

06:16Therefore, in its own jurisdiction, the committee is supreme.

06:22The parliament is supreme in its own jurisdiction.

06:27But now let me clarify that yes, the legalization work is of the parliament.

06:33But if the legalization is done against the constitution, then the Supreme Court can also strike it down.

06:41Therefore, the final authority that which law is in accordance with the constitution or not,

06:48is only with the courts, the High Court and the Supreme Court.

06:53Here, it cannot be said that you cannot examine the law we have made in the context of the constitution.

07:02So, now the ordinance has come about the practice and procedure.

07:05It came, it was signed, it was passed.

07:08Now, the government talks about bringing it to the assembly, but it has been implemented.

07:11Now, the new benches that have been formed, the committee that has been formed, there is no justice minister in it.

07:15And today we saw that Mansoor Ali Shah Sahib got up from that committee and wrote a letter about the formation of that committee.

07:23So, this crisis is deepening in the Supreme Court.

07:27So, if there is not such a weak agreement between them, then how will they get their decisions implemented?

07:34Do you think this is going to be a problem?

07:39Look, there is definitely a problem.

07:41At present, the role of the Chief Justice is very disappointing.

07:46And he himself is dividing his own court.

07:50This is the same situation I am seeing, which was born in 1997,

07:57when Sajjad Ali Shah took a few judges with him, three or four,

08:01he prepared all kinds of things against the majority.

08:07Ultimately, the majority prevailed and he was released.

08:13So, I think the judge is not doing his job.

08:20He is in his last days.

08:22He has one month left.

08:24He has one month left.

08:25He has one month left.

08:26He has one month left.

08:27He has one month left.

08:28He has one month left.

08:29He has one month left.

08:30He has one month left.

08:31He has one month left.

08:32He has one month left.

08:33He has one month left.

08:34He has one month left.

08:35He has one month left.

08:36He has one month left.

08:37He has one month left.

08:38He has one month left.

08:39He has one month left.

08:40He has one month left.

08:41He has one month left.

08:42He has one month left.

08:43He has one month left.

08:44He has one month left.

08:45He has one month left.

08:46He has one month left.

08:47He has one month left.

08:48He has one month left.

08:49He has one month left.

08:50He has one month left.

Category

Transcript

Recommended