SC Strikes Down 2022 Ruling on Article 63-A: Major Relief for Government
A review appeal against the Supreme Court of Pakistan’s 2022 ruling regarding the defection clause under Article 63-A of the Constitution was unanimously approved, marking a significant development. The government may experience significant relief from this decision, which was made public on Thursday, in its attempts to win support for constitutional reforms.
Key Points of the Ruling
The Supreme Court has unanimously accepted the review petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) in June 2022. The 2022 verdict, which declared that votes cast against party lines in certain instances should not be counted, has now been struck down. Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa announced that a detailed verdict would be issued later, providing further clarification on the matter.
Background of the Case
The 2022 Verdict
The Supreme Court ruled on May 17, 2022, that votes cast in four distinct cases—against party lines—should not be counted. These included votes of confidence or no confidence, money bills, constitutional change measures, and the election of the prime minister and chief minister. The majority of the judges on the case were Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, and the then-CJP Umar Ata Bandial, with a vote of 3-2.
Review Petition
The SCBA filed a review petition in June 2022, arguing that further interpretation of Article 63-A would effectively “rewrite or read into the Constitution.” A five-member bench headed by CJP Isa heard this review petition.
Implications of the New Ruling
The verdict has several significant consequences, one of which is that legislators’ votes against party doctrine will now be tallied in subsequent legislative sessions. Since MPs would no longer be entirely partisan, it should be simpler for the administration to garner support for proposed constitutional revisions as a result of this decision. The verdict makes it clear that the main way that Article 63-A limits parliamentarians’ ability to vote is by requiring them to follow the decisions made by the “Party Head.”
Key Arguments and Observations
CJP Isa’s Remarks
CJP Isa questioned whether it was democratic for judges to exercise the same authority as a party leader. He noted that members of the assembly or political parties are not subordinate to judges, and judges should only determine the constitutionality and legality of actions, rather than influence party decisions.
Other Judicial Observations
Justice Mandokhail questioned the notion of how the right to vote of lawmakers could be construed as membership to a political party. The topic of horse-trading was also covered by the court, and CJP Isa cautioned against the casual application of such terminology in judicial contexts.
Proceedings Highlights
Ali Zafar, the PTI’s legal representative, first declared a boycott during the hearings but then came back to the court as an amicus curiae, providing the judges with advice. if the 2022 conclusion was more of an opinion or a judgement, and if it was practically implementable, were just two of the topics discussed during the debates. Senator Farooq H. Naek, the PPP’s legal representative, supported floor crossing by citing several instances from around the world.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn its earlier decision regarding the defection clause marks a significant change in the future interpretation of Article 63-A. This decision is a big relief for the government since it will make the process of amending the constitution run more smoothly. It is anticipated that the upcoming comprehensive verdict would provide more light on the wider effects that this decision will have on Pakistan’s political environment.