Rabbani says Article 63A does not deprive MP of voting right
ISLAMABAD: Former Chairman Senate Mian Raza Rabbani said, “with mala fide intent, the government is creating misunderstanding on the interpretation of Article 63A of Constitution, 1973 as the provisions of disqualification under Article 63A will become effective once if a member leaves a Parliamentary Party and/or exercises his right to vote against the party whip.”
“Article 63A, Constitution, 1973, cannot be used to deprive a member of voting in whatsoever manner that he desires,” he said while giving his views on the issue of 63-A.
Raza Rabbani, who articulated the 18th Amendment in the Constitution, said the Speaker/ Presiding Officer has no powers, under the Constitution, and/ or Rules of Business of the National Assembly, to stop a member from exercising his right to vote.
On the contrary, he said, the Speaker must provide an atmosphere within the precincts and the House in which a member can perform his parliamentary duties including the right to vote, in a safe and transparent atmosphere.
Rabbani said the intent of Article 63A, Constitution, 1973, is to forewarn a member that if he leaves a Parliamentary Party and/or votes against the party whip, as a consequence of such act, he can be disqualified, should a member, in full knowledge of the provisions of Article 63A, 1973, still wants to exercise his right to vote according to his conscience and subsequently, is to bear the consequences, if any, under the rules, law and the Constitution, he cannot be prevented from doing so.
He said it is, thus, abundantly clear that the provisions of Article 63A, Constitution, 1973, are not a bar nor, in any way, prevent a member from casting his vote.
He said such an interpretation of Article 63A, Constitution, 1973, and also the fact that Speaker National Assembly is looking for ways and means to scuttle the Vote of No Confidence, prove the fact that the Prime Minister no longer commands the majority of the members of the National Assembly.
The former Chairman Senate said such a move of scuttling the No Confidence Motion without it being put to the vote, will be unconstitutional. “Any such person shall be circumventing and subverting the Constitution, 1973,” he said.
-
Cure Flu With Theses Two Golden Foods -
King Charles Delayed Taking Firm Stance Against Andrew But William Pushed Action -
Toronto Blue Jays Roster Faces Setback With Multiple Injury Concerns -
Demi Lovato Leaves Fans Disappointed With Unexpected Announcement -
Pacers Vs Knicks Overtime Thriller Ends In Heartbreak For New York -
Who Owns The Ambassador Bridge? New Report Links Owner Matthew Moroun To Trump’s Threat -
ICE Detention Center Plan Sparks Controversy In Maryland As Lawmakers Push Back -
Blood Pressure Medication Recalled After Wrong Tablets Found In Bottles -
Why Ariana Grande Wants A 'tiny Mouse' To Play Her In Biopic? -
Wind Chill Returns With Brutal Cold As Polar Vortex Stalls Over Canada -
Princess Beatrice, Eugenie ‘do Not Want To Be Seen In Public’ Because Of Dad -
Costco $20 Rule Explained As Employee Pay Climbs Across North America -
Strange Incident Happened At Nancy Guthrie's Home On Abduction's 10th Day -
Tumbler Ridge School Lockdown Underway As RCMP Investigate School Shooting -
Royal Family Knows There Can Be ‘no More Glossing’ Of Andrew Downfall -
Britney Spears Quietly Parts Ways With Her Music Catalog: Report