Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to
LHC issues notices to 69 MNAs for abstaining from vote during PM's election
The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday issued notices to 69 members of the National Assembly for abstaining from voting during the election for prime minister as it heard a petition challenging Imran Khan's election as PM.
Petitioner Sheikh Zahid Mahmood's counsel A.K. Dogar filed a case on Aug 30 pleading that it was mandatory under Article 91(4) of the Constitution for every MNA to cast his/her vote to person(s) nominated for the election of prime minister.
The petitioner maintained that two major political parties, the PPP and the Jamaat-i-Islami, did not cast their votes in the election for PM. He held that the chosen representatives of the people could not abstain from voting and urged the court to declare that the election of PM Khan had been unconstitutional. He also asked that it be made essential for every citizen of voting age in Pakistan to cast their vote in the general election.
The court accepted the petition on Sept 4 and set Nov 1 as the date of the first hearing of the case. The petitioner, however, asked the court on Thursday to expedite hearing of the case. The Election Commission of Pakistan, PM Khan, PPP, JI and the federal law ministry have been made party to the case.
Comments (15) Closed
There is no law against abstaining. Whether out of conscience or self interest there is no law against it.
Unfortunately there are many attention seekers on all sides.
Another Lahore drama that will not lead anywhere.
Just useless petitions wasting their own time and of court. Just tools to gain some popularity. Wonder, why courts accept such applications at all when there are already so many pending cases.
... and if an MNA does not cast her/his vote, what punishment is stipulated in the constitution for abstaining?
Whose fault is it if they didn't cast the votes? Pehle chori phir seena zori.......wah. enough of this chest thumbing just accept it.
"Petitioner Sheikh Zahid Mahmood's counsel A.K. Dogar filed a case on Aug 30 pleading that it was mandatory under Article 91(4) of the Constitution for every MNA to cast his/her vote to person(s) nominated for the election of prime minister."
Article 91(40) says "The Prime Minister shall be elected by the votes of the majority of the total membership of the National Assembly." I did not find any word of mandadtory under article 91(4). In my opinion the petition was not maintainable by the court.
why isnt the court making this petition null and void. a completely absurd petition. Why do the courts want to waste their time, nothing better to do?
The court is prayed to immediately order the ECP to denotify these MNAs i.e cancel their assembly seat and ask for reelection.In this way the assembly members will deliver.
Article 91 (4) The Prime Minister shall be elected by the votes of the majority of the total membership of the National Assembly: Provided that, if no member secures such majority in the first poll, a second poll shall be held between the members who secure the two highest numbers of votes in the first poll and the member who secures a majority of votes of the members present and voting shall be declared to have been elected as Prime Minister: Provided further that, if the number of votes secured by two or more members securing the highest number of votes is equal, further poll shall be held between them until one of them secures a majority of votes of the members present and voting.
LHC, and counsel AK Dogar must be reading some other country’s constitution, as article 91(4) of Constitution of Pakistan does not state it is men
Instead of nullyfing the election of PM court should order reelection of those members seats to teach a lesson so that such things should not happen again.
What a comedy of errors! The whole 5 years tenure of these MNAs passes with empty seats more than the occupied and no lice ever creeps on the ear of the justice. And when just 69 of them abstain for one particular day, the whole hell is let loose.
So there is nothing more important than this?
It is every members choice to For, Against or Abstain. It sounds like a lousy case and is against basic priciples of democracy.
Those calling this petition frivolous need to go and read constitution article. Law should be followed OR changed. You can't decide which to follow and which not.