ISLAMABAD: National Assembly Speaker Ayaz Sadiq declared on Monday that no actions regarding reserved seats will be taken until the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) issues an official notification.
He expressed his refusal to comply with the Supreme Court’s orders concerning the reserved seats issue.
In an interview with a private television channel, Sadiq raised concerns about recent party shifts among members, particularly those joining the Sunni Ittehad Council, questioning the legitimacy of their retroactive affiliations. He pointed out the recent amendments to election laws, suggesting that Parliament should have similar authority to amend the Constitution as the Supreme Court.
“It is the responsibility of the Election Commission to notify the members,” Sadiq stated. “If we start following court orders without an ECP notification, there could be numerous conflicting decisions. We will not act on the court’s directive; we will await the ECP’s notification.”
Sadiq made it clear that while he respects court orders, he will not take action without the ECP’s official communication. His comments highlight ongoing tensions regarding party loyalty and the implications of shifting allegiances within the National Assembly.
In a significant ruling in July, the Supreme Court allowed the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) to claim reserved seats for women and non-Muslims in the national and provincial assemblies, bolstering the party’s legislative position. Sadiq remarked, “The court indicated that PTI could change party affiliation after a period of 15 days, which allowed members to join the Sunni Ittehad Council, effectively permitting floor crossing.”
He emphasized that had PTI members not joined the SIC, the results could have been entirely different. “Instead, the court’s decision effectively rewrote parts of the Constitution by granting them an extension,” he said.
Sadiq argued that the recent constitutional amendments limit the Supreme Court’s power over such matters. He noted, “If the court claims we cannot make decisions because of backdated changes, we could similarly argue that their decision was also backdated.”
When asked whether he favors the ECP over the Supreme Court, Sadiq confirmed his inclination to await the ECP’s directives on parliamentary matters. “Once we have the ECP’s notification, we will deliberate and make our decisions accordingly,” he added.
Furthermore, Sadiq stated that the Supreme Court lacks the authority to challenge the recently enacted 26th constitutional amendment, as doing so would conflict with the Constitution itself. Earlier this week, a petition was submitted to the Supreme Court seeking to annul the 26th Amendment, calling for a judicial inquiry into whether the two-thirds majority was legitimately achieved.
Sadiq criticized this initiative, reaffirming that while the court interprets the Constitution, it cannot alter its provisions. “It is embedded in the rules,” he remarked. “The court should not challenge constitutional amendments, as this would breach the Constitution. Nonetheless, the calls to contest the amendment seem to be diminishing.”
