PM Shehbaz equates SC’s Punjab polls verdict to ‘murder of justice’ reminiscent of ZAB’s ‘judicial murder’

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Tuesday termed the Supreme Court’s decision in the delayed Punjab polls case as another “murder of justice” akin to former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s “judicial murder”.

Earlier today, the Supreme Court ruled that the Election Commission of Pakistan’s decision (ECP) to postpone polls to the Punjab Assembly till October 8 was “unconstitutional” and fixed May 14 as the date for polls in the province.

The reserved verdict was issued by a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Ijazul Ahsan.

Responding to the verdict in his brief National Assembly address, the prime minister paid tribute to Bhutto on his death anniversary for his role in finalising the 1973 Constitution. Bhutto was hanged to death on the orders of the then Supreme Court on April 4, 1979. Today is his 44th death anniversary.

“What injustice of the date this is that today is April 4 and former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s judicial murder happened today and today again justice was murdered regarding the election-related proceedings in the last 72 hours.”

The prime minister said no amount of condemnation would suffice for the above.

He said the federal cabinet also decided today that a reference over Bhutto’s judicial murder, which had been pending for the last 12 years, should be taken up and decided by a full court.

Nawaz calls for reference against judges

Meanwhile, PML-N supremo Nawaz Sharif termed the Supreme Court’s decision as a “chargesheet” against the three-member bench that heard it, and said a reference should be submitted against its members in the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).

Addressing the matter in a London media talk, Nawaz said: “I think a reference should be submitted in the SJC against these three judges for their decision which carries the status of a chargesheet against them.”

Nawaz said that the three-member bench had refused the decision of its four fellow judges. “What they call a verdict is not a decision but a one-man show in the words of the judges themselves, and the decision of this case has already come before from four judges,” he added.

In February’s suo motu proceedings regarding the delay in the announcement of a date for elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, four judges from the initial nine-member bench had raised objections on the bench’s constitution as well as the invocation of the apex court’s suo motu jurisdiction by the chief justice.

Nawaz said all of the above was being done in “love for a blue-eyed [boy] by paralysing the government and destroying everything”, adding that the current situation the country was passing through was “very sad and highly painful”.

He alleged that this situation was not of his or the people’s making but the judges’ for the past 70 years.

Nawaz alleged that the judges in the three-member bench rewrote the Constitution through their decision last year on a presidential reference seeking interpretation of Article 63-A of the Constitution while they reproached politicians for supposed unconstitutional actions.

The PML-N supremo questioned why the three-member bench hesitated in making a full court bench for the Punjab polls case and was insistent on hearing it. “I don’t understand it,” he added.

Nawaz said that two members of the bench were those who had given decisions against him and his party.

Although he did not specify the cases, Justice Ahsan was part of the bench that had disqualified him in the Panama Papers case.

The former prime minister alleged that certain former judges and chief justices had colluded with the establishment to orchestrate his ouster.

Nawaz contrasted the treatment meted out to former prime ministers and dictators by the courts, questioning why the doctrine of necessity was created for the latter and why they were “hugged and garlanded” and allowed to amend the Constitution.

He said that even if the doctrine of necessity was accepted as a reality, “why was it only afforded to dictators and not prime ministers?”

Political crisis will further aggravate: law minister

In a press conference shortly after the verdict was announced, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar lamented the ruling and said the apex court should have decided with “collective wisdom”. “The full court should have heard the case,” he added.

The minister foresaw that the “current political situation and crisis will further aggravate”.

He said ECP lawyers and other stakeholders had argued that the court should first decide on the March 1 verdict — which was “rejected 4-3 […] a full court should have cleared this confusion.”

He said the cabinet would discuss the matter in its meeting today.

Earlier today, Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah had said that elections should be held in the country simultaneously, adding that separate polls to provincial assemblies will only create anarchy, chaos and further political crises.

In a series of [tweets][5], PML-N chief organiser Maryam Nawaz rejected the verdict. She alleged that the order was a part of the “controversy” through which the Punjab government was being given to PTI chairman Imran Khan in a “plate”.

Maryam cast aspersions on the three-member bench that issued the verdict, claiming that the “one-man show” in the SC had been challenged from inside the apex court.

She then called on the Parliament to “stop this facilitation” through its constitutional and legal powers.