"Supreme Court has exceeded its Authority in Interpreting Article 63-A of the Constitution" Murtaza Wahab

ARY NEWS

#kamranmurtaza #murtazawahab #bilawalbhutto #pmlngovt #juif #fazalurrehman #bilawalbhutto #supremecourt #qazifaezisa #constitutionalamendment   "Supreme Court has exceeded its Authority in Interpreting Article 63-A of the Constitution" Murtaza Wahab

Transcript

00:00So, can it be said that your and the JUIF's stance on this amendment regarding the military courts was almost the same?

00:07You both felt that this should not be done?

00:09We say that the Supreme Court itself has decided on this.

00:12Stay on that.

00:13Stay on that. You should not divert it.

00:15This is one thing.

00:16And we had also convinced the government on this.

00:19So, this does not happen now?

00:20That we convinced the government that the absolute right should not be there.

00:23Absolutely agreed on this.

00:24That the absolute right should not be there. Judicial review should be there.

00:26So, it would be right to say that there will be no amendment regarding this?

00:32Yes.

00:33Let's move ahead.

00:34The decision of Article 63A,

00:36they gave the opinion that,

00:38we also think that this decision is wrong,

00:41but the decision should not be overturned through a constitutional amendment,

00:44it should be overturned through a review.

00:46Do you think that it should be overturned through a constitutional amendment?

00:49This is a very interesting question.

00:52I always believe that when we talk in confidence,

00:55it should not be done in a public manner.

00:58There was a very interesting discussion,

01:00and in that discussion,

01:01when Article 63A was mentioned,

01:03every political party in Pakistan,

01:05is in agreement on the fact that,

01:07the Supreme Court's decision on Article 63A,

01:10it was overturned through a constitutional amendment.

01:12The words that are written in the law,

01:14they are not obvious.

01:15You said that everyone is in agreement,

01:17but PTI is not in agreement.

01:19Leave that.

01:20PTI is a cricket team.

01:22We are talking about JUI.

01:24We are talking about JUI.

01:25Maulana Sahab is in agreement on this,

01:27his opinion is also in agreement.

01:29Kamran Murtaza Sahab himself says that,

01:31the Supreme Court's decision is wrong.

01:35Right?

01:36But he says that it should not be overturned.

01:38No, he says that it should be overturned,

01:39not through a court, but through a review.

01:41Tashkent, the Parliament's job is not to legislate.

01:44The court tells the government,

01:46the Parliament every day that,

01:47something is wrong with you,

01:48we want to fix it.

01:49And the Parliament's primary job is to legislate.

01:53If there is a mistake in the law,

01:55it should be corrected,

01:56which this book gives us.

01:58Right?

01:59You are saying that we should not do that.

02:01So, won't the precedent be set?

02:03That a decision has come from the Supreme Court,

02:05the Parliament did not find it right,

02:06so the two-thirds should manage and increase the decision.

02:08Won't this be a dangerous precedent?

02:10Okay, you tell me,

02:11what happens in democracies?

02:13Who has the right to legislate?

02:17So, if we get a number,

02:18the Parliament can do anything?

02:19One minute,

02:20let me answer this too.

02:22One minute,

02:23a very good discussion is going on,

02:25let me stop here.

02:26The Prime Minister is Pakistan,

02:28all-powerful, right?

02:29Or the Prime Minister is all-powerful,

02:31or the President is all-powerful.

02:33Can he alone,

02:35change any word in this book?

02:37No.

02:38Right?

02:39Can he change any law?

02:41Two-thirds are needed, right?

02:43If 51% is needed for the law,

02:44then two-thirds.

02:45Right?

02:46But the judge,

02:48in this book,

02:50puts words in it.

02:53He puts words in it.

02:54Is this right?

02:55Now tell me.

02:56Not literally,

02:57but you are saying that the decision was

02:58equivalent of rewriting the Constitution,

03:00according to you.

03:01Yes, it is.

03:02They have rewritten the Constitution.

03:03Why?

03:04In 63A,

03:05there is no mention of counting of votes.

03:08In the Elections Act,

03:09it is written that

03:10an independent person

03:11will join the political party

03:12within three days.

03:15The Supreme Court has given the direction,

03:16the judge,

03:17to give 15 days.

03:18Then you do one thing,

03:19you say that the law will be

03:21what the judge says.

03:23This big parliament of yours,

03:25probably 336 members,

03:27National Assembly,

03:2896 senators,

03:30one thing,

03:31whenever we talk,

03:33But this is your opinion,

03:35if both don't agree,

03:36then what will you do?

03:37I said,

03:38either they will agree,

03:39or they will agree.

03:40Otherwise?

03:41See,

03:42if two-thirds are not there,

03:43then there can't be an amendment.

03:44It is a very simple thing.

03:45See,

03:46we always follow our opinion.

03:49Everyone agrees that

03:51this paper,

03:52this book,

03:53is Supreme.

03:54In the preamble of this book,

03:56the National Assembly

03:57has written,

03:58wherein the state

04:00shall exercise its powers

04:02and authority

04:03through the chosen

04:04representatives of the people.

04:06Who has to decide?

04:07Of course,

04:08the representatives of the people.

04:09But this

04:10delusion that is created again and again,

04:12But the Supreme Court also says,

04:14Mansoor Ali Shah has quoted,

04:15and many others,

04:16Atharv Mananlal has also,

04:17that the decision that has just come,

04:19which was the last one?

04:20Yes,

04:21the one with 8 members.

04:22No,

04:23the one before that,

04:24in which he said,

04:25it is absolutely right,

04:26the Parliament has the right to legislate.

04:28We are not gatekeepers.

04:29However,

04:30He did this in the Napa case.

04:32Yes,

04:33in the Napa case.

04:35However,

04:36if that legislation

04:37is contradicted by the constitution,

04:38then we will also come.

04:39Tell me,

04:40where is it written in this constitution?

04:41That if the legislation

04:42is contradicted by the constitution,

04:43then the court will come.

04:44Who has to make the constitution?

04:45The Parliament.

04:46The Parliament.

04:47So,

04:48the chosen representatives of the people

04:49of the Parliament will sit,

04:50they will make the constitution.

04:51They will make the constitution

04:52and set the parameters.

04:53What is the basic principle of the constitution?

04:54It is a trichotomy of power.

04:55There is an executive,

04:56there is a legislature,

04:57there is a judiciary.

04:58So,

04:59if the Parliament passes something

05:00that is contradicted by the constitution,

05:01then what will happen?

05:02The court will not do anything?

05:03It can be changed.

05:04But,

05:05One minute,

05:06you can change it,

05:07but

05:08something that is contradicted by the constitution,

05:09for example,

05:10So,

05:11who will decide now?

05:12The Parliament,

05:13see,

05:14the basic thing

05:15that you have to decide is

05:16what are the limits of the Parliament,

05:17what are the limits of the court.

05:18If the Parliament

05:19intervenes in judicial matters

05:20and makes decisions,

05:21is that the right thing?

05:22No.

05:23Is it wrong?

05:24Every institution

05:25should stay within its limits.

05:26Right?

05:27Similarly,

05:28if the court

05:29changes the word of the law

05:30and changes 3 to 15,

05:3115 to 3,

05:32is this right?

05:33No.

05:34That is why I say again and again

05:35that if we want to move forward

05:36as a nation,

05:37we will have to do introspection.

05:38Where I have said

05:39something wrong,

05:40I have to accept it

05:41and move forward

05:42in a reformed way.

05:43And,

05:44if there is another institution,

05:45they also have to think the same.

05:46Fair enough.

05:47Let's move on to the next question.

05:48This is also a related question.

05:49In today's development,

05:50I am saying that

05:51if,

05:52for example,

05:53without going into details,

05:54those special sessions

05:55are given back

05:56to the ruling communities,

05:57then the number game

05:58of Maulana Sahib

05:59will be completed

06:00even without him coming.

06:01So,

06:02can this be passed

06:03in this way

06:04as well?

06:05But,

06:06again,

06:07to the best of my knowledge,

06:08Article 51

06:09is probably

06:10an amendment.

06:11That is not being considered.

06:12That is,

06:13again,

06:14not on the table.

06:15So,

06:16you are telling me

06:17that as we speak,

06:18till now,

06:19the structure

06:20of the parliament

06:21at this time,

06:22if we get the truth

06:23of that,

06:24then we will do it

06:25or not.

06:26Am I right?

06:27Absolutely.

06:28It is not like

06:29that you bring in

06:30the special people

06:31and then get it back.

06:32It is not like

06:33that I bring in

06:344, 5, 6, 8, 10 people

06:35and say that

06:36I am legislating today.

06:37You bring in

06:384, 5, 6, 8, 10 people

06:39who are deprived

06:40of their seats

06:41as a result of that

06:42decision,

06:43get their notification

06:44and then complete

06:45the number and

06:46pass it.

06:47This will not happen.

06:48This is not going to happen.

06:49And,

06:50in any way,

06:51all this work

06:52cannot be done

06:53through any

06:54ordinance,

06:55right?

06:56It cannot be done

06:57by 2-3 people.

06:58No,

06:59no,

07:00wait a minute.

07:01Anything can be done

07:02in this country.

07:03No,

07:04even martial law

07:05can be done

07:06by 2-3 people

07:07who are deprived

07:08of their seats

07:09as a result of that

07:10decision.

07:11This is not

07:12going to happen.

07:13This is not

07:14going to happen.

07:15This is not

07:16going to happen.

07:17This is not

07:18going to happen.

07:19This is not

07:20going to happen.

07:21This is not

07:22going to happen.

07:23This is not

07:24going to happen.

07:25This is not

07:26going to happen.

07:27This is not

07:28going to happen.

07:29This is not

07:30going to happen.

07:31This is not

07:32going to happen.

07:33This is not

07:34going to happen.

07:35This is not

07:36going to happen.

07:37This is not

07:38going to happen.

07:39This is not

07:40going to happen.

07:41This is not

07:42going to happen.

07:43This is not

07:44going to happen.

07:45This is not

07:46going to happen.

07:47This is not

07:48going to happen.

07:49This is not

07:50going to happen.

07:51This is not

07:52going to happen.

07:53This is not

07:54going to happen.

07:55This is not

07:56going to happen.

07:57This is not

07:58going to happen.

07:59This is not

08:00going to happen.

08:01This is not

08:02going to happen.

08:03This is not

08:04going to happen.

08:05This is not

08:06going to happen.

08:07This is not

08:08going to happen.

08:09This is not

08:10going to happen.

08:11This is not

08:12going to happen.

08:13This is not

08:14going to happen.

08:15This is not

08:16going to happen.

08:17This is not

08:18going to happen.

08:19This is not

08:20going to happen.

08:21This is not

08:22going to happen.

08:23This is not

08:24going to happen.

08:25This is not

08:26going to happen.

08:27This is not

08:28going to happen.

08:29This is not

08:30going to happen.

08:31This is not

08:32going to happen.

Category

Transcript

Recommended