Ruling on NA dissolution: SC dismisses review pleas by ex-speaker Asad, deputy speaker Suri

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday dismissed the review petitions, filed against the annulment of the deputy speaker’s ruling to dissolve the National Assembly.

A five-member larger bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and comprising Justice Muneeb Akhtar, Justice Aminuddin Khan, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel and Justice Athar Minullah, heard the petitions, filed by former prime minister Imran Khan, former speaker National Assembly Asad Qaiser, former deputy speaker Qasim Suri and President Dr. Arif Alvi against the ruling related to dissolution of the National Assembly.

Lawyer Naeem Bukhari appeared on behalf of former speaker Asad Qaiser and former deputy speaker Qasim Suri, and argued that the speaker was not accountable to anyone for the decisions, taken during the NA proceedings.

The counsel contended that the decisions taken during the proceedings of the house against the speaker and the deputy speaker should not be processed.

Justice Muneeb Akhtar, however, observed that the matter of proceedings of the assembly was not before the court but the court gave the decision against the process of dissolution of the assembly.

Justice Muneeb asked the counsel as to whether he wanted an assurance of not taking action against the deputy speaker. “Rest assured, this matter is not about the speaker or the deputy speaker,” Justice Akhtar told Bukhari.

Justice Mansoor observed that there was a misunderstanding that the proceedings of the parliament were being interfered with. “We were not looking into proceedings of the parliament; we were only looking into violation of the Constitution,” Justice Mansoor added. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel observed that the question arises as to whether any provision of the constitution could be abolished through the speaker’s ruling. Justice Muneeb observed that the court had seen every aspect, adding that review was not required to filed against the decision.

Earlier, when the court resumed the proceedings on the matter, other counsel for the petitioner did not appear, except for Naeem Bukhari. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah asked Naeem Bukhari as to whether he wanted to proceed with the case? “Bukhari sahib, you are let alone,” Justice Jamal Mandokhel remarked. “Should I go too,” Bukhari replied, causing laughter in the courtroom. The counsel submitted that people often misunderstand his sense of humour, adding that now people don’t call him to funerals, fearing he might say jokes on the request of the dead body. Bukhari contended that the court could not interfere in parliament’s proceedings, adding that the proceedings of the parliament were conducted according to its rules of business.