ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed as non-maintainable identical petitions seeking shift to a United States-style presidential system from the incumbent parliamentary government.
“There is no clause in the Constitution which mandates the Supreme Court to issue instructions to the prime minister for a referendum for the presidential form of government,” it ruled.
A three-member bench — headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar — upheld the objections on petition raised by the court’s Registrar Office.
The court took up an appeal against the objections. “It is a political question, how could the court intervene in it [n the process],” Justice Shah questioned.
“If [a parliamentarian] has raised a question or demanded in the parliament on the presidential form of government.”
“How can a single person make such a demand […] changing the system of government,” Justice Akhtar asked. “It is prime minister’s discretion to refer the matter for a referendum on the issue to the joint sitting of the parliament.”
“[In any case] the matter will be decided by the parliament,” Justice Akhtar said.
“The parliament is currently dysfunctional,” a petitioner, Ahmad Raza Khan Kasuri, claimed. “I am [one of the] founder[s] of the 1973 Constitution,” he said.
“Did you sign for the parliamentary system in the constitution,” the court questioned. “Neither I voted nor signed on the constitution,” he replied.
“Then you could not claim to be a founder of the constitution,” Justice Akhtar said.
Four petitioners — Kasuri, Sadiq Ali, Tahir Aziz Khan and Hafeez ur-Rehman Chaudhry — had filed identical constitutional petitions under Article 184(3) of the Constitution arguing for a presidential form of government in the country.
They requested the Supreme Court, “being the custodian of the rights of people and the Constitution”, may direct the prime minister to hold a referendum under Article 48(6) in order to ascertain and determine the will of the people.
