Setback to PTI narrative

62

IN a major setback to the intensively-built narrative of the PTI about the so-called foreign aided plan of regime change in Pakistan, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has squarely rejected the foreign conspiracy theory of the party adding courts give verdicts on evidence not speculations.

In its detailed judgement in suo motu notice case on the ruling by the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly under Article 5 of the Constitution on the day of voting on the no-confidence motion against the Prime Minister, the court observed that it was the duty of the executive to take a decision on cipher but the PTI government didn’t conduct or order any inquiry.

The theory repeatedly stands discredited but the PTI is still sticking to its previous position just to take political mileage out of a purely diplomatic issue that should have been tackled as per routine practice.

However, its rejection by the apex court of the country is significant as the diplomatic cable was dubbed by the PTI leadership as the most authentic evidence of foreign conspiracy to cause the fall of Imran Khan Government.

Contrary to the viewpoint expressed by the party, the Supreme Court has held that the content placed before it constituted no evidence to support the allegation of a foreign aided conspiracy by the opposition parties to remove the Government.

The court has also rightly pointed out that why PTI, which later started urging the top court to conduct judicial inquiry into the matter, did not initiate an inquiry for weeks as mandated by the law.

It rubbished the demand by the ‘respondents’ that the court should suo motu take up the defence of national security and allegation of breach of sovereignty saying in the absence of evidence prima facie demonstrating the plea of the respondents, the court lacks the jurisdiction to launch into a roving inquiry.

In the detailed judgement, the court has reiterated its previous position of declaring the ruling of the Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri (rejecting the no-confidence motion without voting) as unconstitutional.

It held the former Deputy Speaker breached his constitutional duty, In his additional note, a member of the bench Justice Mazahar Alam Khan Miankhel observed that the exercise of authority was a sacred trust which was violated by the President, the then PM, the then Speaker, the then Deputy Speaker and the then Law Minister leaving it open for Parliament to take suitable measures to stop such like mess in future.

We hope Parliament would take necessary steps in this regard but one wonders why the court just pointed out and ignored blatant violations of the Constitution that have consequences for the future of the country.

 

Previous articleKashmir: History of subjugation and resistance | By Dr Muhammad Khan
Next articleDaily Cartoon 15-07-2022