ISLAMABAD: The federal government has sought two weeks from the Supreme Court to seek review of the court’s Feb 21 verdict in which it had ruled that a person disqualified under Article 62(1f) of the Constitution could not hold the leadership of a party.

The verdict was announced by a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar in which it was held that former prime minister Nawaz Sharif after being disqualified could not hold office of the PML-N head.

On Thursday, a hurriedly drafted review petition was filed on behalf of the law secretary with a prayer to accept the petition and set aside impugned verdict of Feb 21 in the interest of justice.

But the court office returned the same, saying it lacked proper documentation. Consequently, the government moved another request with a plea to grant it two weeks during which a proper petition for review will be filed.

Supreme Court held on Feb 21 that Sharif after being disqualified cannot be chief of a party

Awami Muslim League chief Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, the Election Commission of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif and secretaries of the National Assembly and the Senate were made respondents in the petition moved under Article 188.

The request was filed through Additional Attorney General (AAG) Mohammad Waqar Rana who appeared on court notice to represent the federal government during the hearings of the case. Under the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, the review petition can only be filed by a counsel who argued the case in the first round of litigation. Therefore, only the AAG could have filed the petition.

In the review petition, the Supreme Court was asked to reconsider interpreting Section 203 of the Election Act, 2017, in the light of Article 17(2) of the Constitution in a manner that Article 63-A should not be read into.

The verdict had held that Sections 203 and 232 of the Election Act – provisions which were under attack by the petitioners and which allow disqualified person to be elected as the president of the party, should be read – construed and interpreted subject to the provisions of Articles 62, 63 and 63-A. These articles put conditions in the shape of qualifications and disqualifications for members to enter into the parliament.

The Supreme Court had further explained that Articles 62, 63 and 63-A created an integrated framework for ensuring that business of the parliament was conducted by persons of probity, integrity and high moral character. These conditions were enforced by Articles 62 and 63 by prescribing qualifications and disqualifications for membership to the parliament, the court said adding that an elected parliament, adorned with the chosen representatives of people on the one hand and the rule of law on the other hand were the foundations of democracy under the Constitution.

Published in Dawn, March 23rd, 2018