Timeline for voting on no-trust resolution can’t be changed

ISLAMABAD: The filing of a reference by the federal government through the president in the Supreme Court seeking an interpretation of the defection clause will not affect the timeline spelt out in the Constitution for voting on the no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan.

Legal experts that The News talked to said that a clear timeframe has been specified in the Constitution to dispose of the no-trust resolution and it cannot be deviated from. Answering questions, senior lawyers Barrister Omar Sajjad and Kashif Malik said that issuance of an order staying the implementation of Article 95 relating to the vote of no-confidence in the National Assembly was ruled out.

Malik said it was clearly mentioned in the Constitution that such a motion must be voted upon not before three days and not later than seven days of its moving in the National Assembly. This is a mandatory provision and there is no escape from it, he said.

He said that an unambiguous timeframe fixed in the Constitution cannot be defeated through any means. Even a plain reading of Article 95 makes it clear, he said, adding that the provision can’t be overridden. Additionally, he said the process can’t be halted and there was no room to go beyond the particular timeline.

Sajjad said that since the reference is filed by the president, the opinion of the Supreme Court would also be sent to him. The opinion, though advisory in nature, will be binding, he said. The lawyer said that when the reference are taken up by the Supreme Court, it would issue notices to the parties concerned. Full-scale arguments would take place on the question submitted to the apex court, a process which takes time while the no-confidence motion has to be voted upon by March 28.

He said it has been written in the Constitution that the party head would issue a notice to the MP who has cast his vote on the no-trust motion against the party’s direction. The alleged floor-crosser would be given time to reply. Later, the party head would send his complaint to the speaker, who would forward the reference to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), which will decide whether the concerned MP has defected or not.

Article 186 says if, at any time, the president considers that it is desirable to obtain the opinion of the Supreme Court on any question of law which he considers of public importance, he may refer the question to the Supreme Court for consideration. The Supreme Court shall consider a question so referred and report its opinion on the question to the president.

This will be the second reference under Article 186 to be filed by the present government. Previously, it had submitted a question seeking an open ballot in the Senate elections. At the time, the government wanted the open ballot under all circumstances. However, the apex court had held that under the Constitution, all elections except those of the prime minister and chief ministers should be held through secret ballot.

The government’s aim is to block the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) members of the National Assembly, who had openly stated that they would vote against the prime minister on the no-trust resolution against Imran Khan.

Sajjad said that nobody could be booked or punished for an offence he has not so far committed. He said an alleged defector would be unseated by the ECP only after he had acted against the direction of the party head. For example, he said, a driver cannot be prosecuted even before a road accident.

He said that the constitutional procedure must be followed at all costs. He said neither the speaker nor any other authority can stop an MP from casting his vote on any motion according to his will and conscience.