ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday refused to entertain a petition moved by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) to challenge the lifelong disqualification of a public office holder under Article 62-1(f).
Article 62-1(f) — which sets the precondition for a member of parliament to be honest and righteous — is the same provision under which deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif was disqualified by the Supreme Court in 2017 in the Panama Papers case.
Former Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) secretary general Jahangir Tareen was also disqualified later that year by a separate bench of the top court under the same provision.
Last week, the wide-ranging petition, moved by SCBA President Ahsan Bhoon, sought the declaration that Supreme Court proceedings under Article 184(3) or Article 199 of the Constitution do not constitute declarations by a court of law, as envisioned in Article 62-1(f), since the affected parties have no recourse or right to appeal.
Today, the registrar office of the court returned the petition after raising objections. It observed a larger bench of the apex court has already settled the matter and a petition seeking review of those verdicts was also dismissed.
Once the Supreme Court hands down a verdict in a matter, a new petition cannot be filed against its ruling, the registrar said.
Bhoon maintained in the petition the court couldn’t assume the responsibilities of a trial court under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution. The said provision doesn’t give the affected person the right to appeal against the verdict, thereby negating the principle of even-handed justice, he added.
The petition reportedly requests the disqualification period of a candidate should be restricted to five years.
In 2018, a five-judge Supreme Court bench unanimously held that disqualification handed down under Article 62-1(f) of the Constitution is for life.
“The restriction imposed by Article 62-1(f) of the Constitution for the eligibility of a candidate for election to Parliament serves the public need and public interest for honest, upright, truthful, trustworthy and prudent elected representatives,” read the judgement.
However, the petition notes that imposing a lifelong ban on a candidate is a violation of their basic rights, adding that in the suo motu notices and other special prerogatives granted to the court, a petitioner must be accorded the right to appeal.
It points out that the apex court has already declared in the local government elections case that the elected representatives could not be kept aloof from the people.
It’s against the very fundamentals of Islam to not pardon those who contemplate and seek forgiveness for their mistakes, it says, citing cases of deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif and the incumbent Imran Khan.
“The Constitution is based on fundamental rights,” it says.
