Justice Athar Minallah issued the detailed judgment on Friday and stated that the Supreme Court’s (SC) suo motu notice regarding the delay in announcing provincial assembly elections and maintained that a 4-3 majority ruling dismissed it.
Previously, the SC had issued orders for President Arif Alvi to announce the Punjab Assembly election date and directed the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) governor to set the provincial assembly election date in consultation with the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). However, the ruling has been subject to differing interpretations, with the government labeling it a “minority ruling.”
Read: ECP announces election schedule for Punjab
Justice Minallah expressed his agreement with the opinions of Justice Shah and Justice Mandokhail, especially concerning the majority 4-3 ruling on the suo motu assumption of jurisdiction. However, he emphasized that the proceedings had unnecessarily exposed the court to political controversies, which affected the public’s trust in the court’s impartiality.
The SC judge raised questions about the dissolution of the Punjab Assembly by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), arguing that the court should not be perceived as advancing the political strategies of stakeholders. According to Justice Minallah, the dissolution of the provincial legislature as part of the political strategy of stakeholders raises questions about whether such conduct is in line with the scheme of constitutional democracy and if it violates the constitution.
Read: Pakistan Supreme Court reinstates Punjab election schedule, declares ECP decision illegal
Justice Minallah also stressed the importance of political stakeholders establishing their bona fides before their petitions could be entertained. He argued that the court should not be seen as facilitating or promoting undemocratic values and strategies. Furthermore, he expressed concern that the court’s involvement in resolving political disputes would erode public trust in its independence and impartiality.
Reflecting on the apex court’s history, Justice Minallah highlighted instances where the SC had engaged in activities unbecoming of its stature. For example, the court had previously exercised jurisdiction under Article 184(3) to legitimize the removal of elected prime ministers and endorse military takeovers. However, the intent of Article 184(3) was to ensure that the jurisdiction was exercised to protect the fundamental rights of the weak, vulnerable, and marginalized classes.
Justice Minallah urged all institutions, including the court, to set aside their egos and work towards fulfilling their constitutional obligations. He highlighted the importance of learning from past mistakes to restore public trust and confidence in the court. In doing so, Justice Minallah emphasized the need for political stakeholders to approach the appropriate forums to resolve disputes rather than involving the courts.
