Should this court accept the infamous "Doctrine Of Necessity"? Justice Athar Minallah asks
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Sunni Ijtihad Council's special sessions on appeals, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah has said that we have taken only one part of the election.
00:08We will have to see what the basis of this issue is. If we close our eyes, how will there be justice?
00:13Chief Justice Faiz Isa has given remarks that everyone wants justice, but mine and your justice can be different.
00:20If someone is in favor of the death penalty, then someone is against it.
00:24We have taken only one part of the election. We asked the SIC if they are a political party and they gave us reserved seats.
00:32Now when we open the lens of complete justice, we say, wait, we can't close our eyes on how we got to the SIC.
00:39We all understand that all those independents have won the election because they held out to the public, they were PTI people.
00:46We don't want to see all that. We want to see a small portion. What else do we want to do with complete justice?
00:55One thing has become absolutely obvious. There has been a grave constitutional violation by excluding a political party
01:05on the basis of misinterpretation of the provisions and a judgment of this court.
01:10Indirectly, this apex court would be validating a grave constitutional violation and thus invoking the doctrine of necessity again.
01:20This is not a case that Patwari has taken the land of someone's inter-party. We are looking at the national elections.
01:28What I find very difficult is to look one segment of the election and ignore a very grave illegality that occurred just a minute before it, which led to that problem.
01:38That is not what justice is. I don't know what justice is.
01:41Since a lot has been said from this side, we all want justice, but it's a very elusive concept.
01:48If you go on personal justice, my concept may be different from your concept.
01:51Someone may be in favor of capital punishment. Someone may be against it.
01:56On a justice principle, do we apply justice principles? We apply the law and the constitutional provisions.
02:03Read all the judgments which introduce the doctrine of necessity, and all of them rely upon the justice principle.
02:09We are now imposing our vision on the nation. Let's, Pakistan, go on the constitutional path for once.
02:17You haven't answered my question. Do we validate a grave constitutional violation which has become obvious before us?
02:27That is premised on something.
02:29That is not premised. The orders have become obvious.
02:34Do you want to respond?
02:36We are ignoring the elephant in the room.
02:39During the hearing of the appeals of the special seats of the Supreme Court, the Attorney General said that
02:44the political parties will be eligible for the special seats only when at least one seat is won.
02:49Just as Sattar Minerla raised the issue, the Election Commission removed a political party from the election.
03:09The total number of seats for 10 still are.
03:12Attorney General, I think you haven't addressed the basic question.
03:15That is in the context of Article 51D.
03:18A political party has been excluded by the Election Commission.
03:24This would be a very grave constitutional violation committed by the Election Commission itself.
03:31So, as a constitutional highest court, it is not our obligation to correct this very serious grave constitutional violation.
03:42It has virtually disenfranchised all those who voted for that political party.
03:48Here, the number of independents are very large, and so you can see the impact that it's having on your proportional representation.
03:55How does a party become a parliamentary party? Which provision governs that?
03:59Anyone who has returned as a candidate or nominee on a political party's ticket will become a member of a parliamentary party or will constitute a parliamentary party.
04:07In other words, independents cannot form a parliamentary party.