Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice (CJ) Justice Athar Minallah hearing PTI resignations case on Thursday remarked that the court cannot give orders to the National Assembly speaker.
Chief Justice of IHC heard the petition against the acceptance of resignation by 10 members of PTI MNAs without constitutional method on Thursday. Barrister Ali Zafar appeared before the IHC bench on behalf of the petitioners.
The issue of resignations of Members of the National Assembly belonging to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) is a ‘political dispute’ that should be resolved in Parliament, Justice Minallah remarked.
The IHC CJ asked the PTI lawyer what is the purpose of this petition and is this a party policy?
Advocate Ali Zafar told the court that the petitioners are with the party policy, and not against it. On which the court questioned that then why do they want to go back to the Parliament?
The court inquired that the lawyer should first clarify that whether they are working against the policy of the party and has the party taken any action against them?
Read more:
The IHC while directing petitioners to prove their good intentions remarked that the court does not interfere in the affairs of Parliament.
Later, the hearing was adjourned for an indefinite period.
The Chief Justice remarked that these are political matters and the forum for their resolution is Parliament and further told the petitioners to satisfy the court that they want to return to their positions in the Parliament in true sense, if that’s the case then it’s fine, adding that Parliament is the biggest forum of this country. Go there and settle your political issues.
PTI resignations
It is pertinent to mention here that the PTI members resigned from the National Assembly after the no-confidence motion against Imran Khan succeeded and ousted him from the Prime Minister’s office. The party members refused to join Parliament and requested that their resignations should be accepted.
While, the resignations of 10 MNAs was accepted, who took the matter again to IHC claiming that the process under Article 64 was not completed and it should be reversed or accepted with other resignations.
Leave a Comment