00:00The case of the special sessions is ongoing in the Supreme Court and the full court bench is sitting and listening to this case.
00:08Viewers, the decision that will come, hopefully it will be concluded tomorrow, the hearing,
00:13in this regard, across the board, the legal experts, the legal experts of Pakistan, according to them,
00:19the effect of this will remain for a long time in the politics of Pakistan, in the parliament of Pakistan, in the judicial history of Pakistan.
00:27This will have an effect on the constitution of the parliament.
00:32If the seats go back to the government, which was given by the Election Commission,
00:36then they will get a two-third majority and then they will be able to legislate as they wish.
00:40They will be able to amend the constitution.
00:42If it does not happen, then of course, the strength of the Pakistan Judicial Council will increase.
00:50Today, from the first day, it is being said that we should act on the constitution.
00:55The Chief Justice is also saying that our fundamental purpose of taking this case is to explain the constitution in such a way that there is no ambiguity in it.
01:03Even today, he said that we have to look at the constitution and act on the constitution.
01:07But the question is that all the ambiguity that has arisen, the confusion, especially the Gordian Knot, is being tried to be opened.
01:16What is the problem?
01:17Senior Pune Judge, who is going to be the Chief Justice in October this year, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, what did he say? What is the way forward?
01:48We don't need to get into SIC. We don't need to get into proportional representation. The whole problem is solved.
01:54Fundamentally, viewers, the decision of the Supreme Court, whose explanation is being told, the remarks that are being made so far, that the Election Commission did not do the right thing.
02:03That the Pakistan Judicial Council existed as a community.
02:07The Chief Justice said the other day that if he had joined his party, it would have been much better for him.
02:12But if the Interpretation Election Commission has done this, that the PTI people are free, they can go back and forth, they cannot join the PTI.
02:20If that correction is done, then the whole matter will be fine. They can be given time again to join.
02:25But anyways, this was his opinion. Justice Athar Manohla also talked about how the wrong explanation of the decision was made.
02:34The whole premise is that since they didn't hold party elections, therefore purportedly they were disqualified to hold themselves out to the people as a political party.
02:47If this premise is removed because this court or that judgment did not in any manner could be construed as disqualifying a political party.
03:02Now, there was a political party, enlisted political party. It was not delisted.
03:09The Election Commission, probably speaking for myself, did not fulfill its obligation and treated them as if they were a disqualified enlisted party.
03:24Now here you see, your whole premise is ruined.
03:31Justice Athar Manohla is saying that your whole case is that you either delisted a party which was a part of the PTI.
03:43If it was an enlisted party, then how did you deny that they cannot join their party or will fight free elections without a party.
03:52So, if this is corrected, then your whole case is finished.
03:56Then on one occasion, Justice Ayesha Malik Sahiba referred to the 2018 elections in KP.
04:02There, the Baab party did not fight the elections.
04:05The Baab party was present in the Senate. Therefore, the elections were not fought in KP.
04:13Later, some free people joined the Baab party and they were given a seat according to the ratio.
04:21So, the argument that is being presented by the Election Commission is completely against it.
04:52Why has your position changed in this election?
04:55I have taken instructions on that CM, my ladyship.
04:59Under instructions, I submit that the Commission has gone through this record, the current Commission as imposed.
05:08There was a context, my ladyship, after the 25th Constitutional Amendment when the FATA areas were merged.
05:16There is a context in which that happened.
05:18You are a constitutional body and you seem to be taking different stances as and when you understand the law, how you choose to understand the law.
05:28There has to be some consistency.
05:30You seem to be pulling things out of a hat and saying, now this is our position, previously that was our position.
05:37Justice Ayesha Malik Sahiba said that whenever the heart wants, the Election Commission takes out a new thing from its hat.
05:44The Election Commission's lawyer said, my ladyship, that was the previous Commission, it made a decision in a context.
05:50But now, the current Election Commission is not in agreement with that decision.
05:56Many questions have been raised in this regard.
05:59After that, Justice Jamal Mantokhil's barrister, Gohar, who is the chairman of PTI, who has not yet agreed with the Election Commission,
06:06he also had a dialogue with them regarding their denomination papers.
06:11Sir, on the first date of hearing, I asked you, specifically that you have submitted your party's declaration and certificate.
06:21Your answer was positive, that yes.
06:23Now, the document that they have given, your nomination papers, in that your declaration is null,
06:30in which nothing is written and there is no certificate.
06:33Is that statement correct or is this document correct?
06:36Every candidate can file four nomination forms.
06:39I have also filed two nomination forms.
06:41Two forms, one for the independent and one for PTI, which they have not given you.
06:46We have been allotted the signatures of independent candidates at four o'clock,
06:50when the Supreme Court's decision came at eleven o'clock.
06:53And we collect the tickets on the day of allotment.
06:56Allotment is now simple, on the 13th.
06:59What you are doing, Your Honour, is that we have given the certificate at the wrong time.
07:02We had sent the certificate at four o'clock, on the 22nd.
07:05The election commission's decision came at nine o'clock.
07:07Sir, we have given two forms.
07:09If they have declared us independent, then let's go for independent.
07:12If they have declared PTI, then PTI.
07:14But we have been provided that there is no independence or PTI written in it.
07:18They have concealed most of it, they have not given you.
07:21Your Honour, this is a very complex case.
07:23Now, of course, the Supreme Court has to decide on this.
07:25Mr. Chaudhary Ghulam, you are watching and listening to this hearing.
07:28And if you agree with my opinion, then tell me,
07:31that the decision of this case will have a very far-reaching impact on the politics of Pakistan.
07:37What will you say?
07:42I would say that your situation on 8th February is correct.
07:46This PTI freedom should be released.
07:50They should be sent to jails.
07:52And they should be put behind bars.
07:55You wanted PTI to be finished.
08:04The people of Pakistan have finished you.
08:08And they have made your conspiracy.
08:11Otherwise, you had done your job.
08:14What is K?
08:20There is no picture of it.
08:22Turbine?
08:23He is a man of 85 years.
08:25He does not know a single word.
08:27He has a thumb impression.
08:29What does he know about the turbine?
08:31What does he know?
08:32And I can give many more examples.
08:34The atrocities that you have committed,
08:36the people of Pakistan have made you so miserable,
08:39that now you are crying.
08:40I say that the people who are sitting inside the assembly,
08:43release them too.
08:44Hang them all.
08:46But the people of Pakistan,
08:49you cannot defeat them,
08:51nor will you be able to.
08:52And sooner or later,
08:54the will of the people will prevail.
08:56I do not agree with these remarks of the Supreme Court.
09:00After every other minute,
09:02many people keep changing.
09:04The Election Commission has played havoc with this country.
09:08And I stand by this statement.
09:11Do what you like.
09:13Mr. Nagvi.
09:15Look, Mr. Chaudhary, let me say one thing.
09:18If there were horses, people would be walking.
09:20This is the answer to that.
09:22But what I said a while ago,
09:24proved to be true in just 10 minutes.
09:26I said a while ago,
09:27what do we media people or politicians do?
09:30We come and talk a little,
09:31and then we move on.
09:32We started a conversation on the budget,
09:34and after 5 minutes,
09:35that conversation changed
09:36and came to a subject of ratings.
09:37The thing is,
09:38we have to talk on each account of the budget.
09:40If we really want to talk about the people,
09:42if we really want to talk about the convenience of the people,
09:45then we have to talk openly
09:47about the convenience of the people.
09:48Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto did a great favor to this country
09:51by doing nationalization.
09:53He took all the property from all those families
09:56under the national government,
09:59which was made with our own money.
10:01All those families had come to the banks,
10:03took loans from the banks,
10:05got all those mills and factories from there,
10:07and it was of our own money.
10:09When Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto took weapons from them,
10:11after that,
10:12the economy of Pakistan was ruined.
10:14The same work will have to be done again.
10:16All these elites who are sitting here,
10:18all these billionaires who are sitting in this country,
10:20built big mills and factories,
10:22started big businesses,
10:24built big airlines,
10:25built big houses.
10:26We will have to get all this from them.
10:28It is of the people's money.
10:29And for that,
10:30we will have to take a big step
10:32if we want to save Pakistan
10:34and make the people comfortable.
10:36Yes.
10:37By the way, Mr. Raghuveer,
10:39your opinion is in its place,
10:40but the policy of nationalization
10:42across the board,
10:44the majority,
10:46the opinion of the economists is that
10:48that wasn't a good decision.
10:49Anyway, your opinion has come forward.
10:50You are saying that we should go back to nationalization.
10:52We will take the opportunity.
10:53Okay, the audience is coming this way.
10:55Mr. Chaudhary.
10:56Okay,
10:57look,
10:58there is an explanation on this.
11:00The lawyers of the Election Commission
11:02are giving an opinion
11:04that whatever we did was in accordance with the law.
11:06But there is another opinion on this,
11:08because this is a matter of proportional representation.
11:10You,
11:11like you,
11:13if you give a law,
11:14it is the same.
11:15I am coming from the same direction.
11:17So,
11:18Mr. Hassan,
11:19I know.
11:20So,
11:21now,
11:22my question is that
11:24this decision,
11:25I,
11:26in my opinion,
11:28it will be an atomic explosion.
11:30It can be decided on any side,
11:32because it would change
11:34the political scenario of Pakistan altogether.
11:37Look,
11:38whether it changes or not,
11:40the thing is that
11:41there should be proportional representation
11:43on the constitution of Pakistan.
11:44This is the position of the Chief Justice.
11:46He said that
11:47we should not become philosophers
11:49or intellectuals
11:50and think that
11:51we should fall under his interpretation.
11:53He said that
11:54there is no ambiguity in the constitution.
11:56He said that there is no ambiguity in the constitution.
11:58No, no,
11:59this is his opinion.
12:00I am telling you that
12:01if there is a need for interpretation
12:03in any law or constitution of Pakistan,
12:05then there is only one institution in Pakistan
12:07which has this right.
12:08Which is it?
12:10Which court?
12:11Supreme Court.
12:12Yes, yes.
12:13Where there is ambiguity.
12:14Where there is need for interpretation.
12:16Some people think that this is it.
12:17Where there is need for interpretation.
12:19Secondly,
12:20the most beautiful thing
12:21that the Chief Justice said today,
12:22he said that
12:23Supreme Court of Pakistan
12:25is a constitutional court.
12:27He said that
12:28Election Commission of Pakistan
12:29is also a constitutional institution.
12:31If,
12:32supposedly,
12:33someone works
12:34against the law,
12:35then that matter
12:36will come in front of us.
12:38But,
12:39in the case of Election Commission,
12:41we should avoid interfering in the court.
12:43The court is also a constitutional institution.
12:45And,
12:46Election Commission is also a constitutional institution.
