Prominent legal experts on Thursday welcomed the decision of the Lahore High Court (LHC) on president’s dual offices as it was strictly in accordance with the constitution. Prominent Supreme Court lawyer, Habibul Wahab Elkhairi termed the LHC decision as the correct interpretation of the constitution.
He said “It was a positive decision of the court as the president represents state and the unity of the republic,” he said. He further said that the president should immediately resign from his office if he has a little sense of the situation. Elkhairi said that in case he continues holding political meetings at Presidency, he is liable to contempt of court proceedings.
When asked if the president enjoys immunity for contempt proceedings, Elkhairi said “Contempt of court does not fall under the purview of criminal proceedings while the president enjoys immunity for criminal proceedings only.” Another prominent lawyer, Hashmat Ali Habib termed the LHC decision strictly in accordance with the constitution but added the decision does not bar the president from holding his office.
“He cannot just hold political meetings in Presidency. Actually he is not President of the Pakistan Peoples Party rather he is co-chairperson of the party,” Habib held. He maintained the same views as were expressed by Elkhairi, in case the president fails to implement the court decision, saying he will be liable to contempt of court proceedings. “It would not be the criminal proceedings for which the president enjoys immunity under the constitution,” he added.
Muhammad Ikram Choudry, senior Supreme Court lawyer, termed the LHC decision positive and in accordance with the spirit of the constitution. He believed that the court upheld the independence and impartiality of judiciary for which legal fraternity of the country had struggled hard. He termed the decision as another step forward towards independence of judiciary. “President, after being elected, is a symbol of the federation and unity of republic. But President Zardari had turned the presidency into a headquarter of his party which has made the president’s office controversial,” he said.
He said President Zardari should have detached himself from political activities earlier. Former Attorney General and senior Supreme Court lawyer, Anwar Mansoor Khan also welcomed the LHC judgment adding that “Contempt of court proceedings fall under the criminal proceedings for which the president enjoys immunity.”
‘He should leave party slot’
LAHORE – No legislation prevents the president from holding the office of the president and that of the party head and the issue is moral, rather than constitutional and this is the reason why a full bench of Lahore High Court had not directed President Asif Ali Zardari to leave the office and only opined that the president may not participate in political activities.
Various constitutional experts expressed these opinions while talking to Pakistan Today. Justice (r) Tariq Mahmood said that full bench of Lahore has relied on the petition filed by Nawaz Sharif against former president Ghulam Ishaq Khan in which the court had held that a president should be neutral and Zardari will have to refrain himself from participating in political activities. Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan refused to give any opinion prior to reading the detailed judgment, however he said that this is verdict of four judges they must have given some argument in the judgement.
Former Punjab Bar Council member and former Lahore Bar Association president Mian Zafar Iqbal Kalauri said that Zardari is not the only president who owns the party office, Rafique Tarrar and Ghulam Ishaq Khan were also very active in their political parties and none of them had reassigned from his political party. He said that this is moral duty of President Asif Ali Zardari to keep him away from political activities.
President Lahore High Court Bar Association Mian Abdul Qadus also refused to give any opinion with out reading the judgment however he wished that Zardari may leave the political office as he is the president of the whole nation, not of a particular party. Staff Report
The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Thursday declared that according to the constitution, being head of the state, President Zardari cannot take part in political activities. Constitutionally, too, this ruling is not sound. As per the ‘Conditions of President’s office’ laid down in Article 43 (1) of the Constitution, “The president shall not hold any office of profit in the service of Pakistan or occupy any other position carrying the right to remuneration for the rendering of services.” Former law minister Babar Awan clarified that the president is allowed to take part in politics according to Article 50 of the Constitution: “As per Clause 2 of the same Article, parliament consists of three components: the National Assembly, Senate and the president.” Under the president’s constitutional obligations, he/she has to meet the prime minister, chief ministers, governors, MNAs and MPAs occasionally. If President Zardari stops holding political activities at the presidency, it will be difficult to deal with issues at hand. Such a suggestion is outside the purview of the court. Our honourable courts need to think whether giving such orders that are hard to implement would bear any fruit. It lowers the dignity of the judiciary to give such constitutionally questionable remarks. We saw in the case of the judiciary’s sugar prices verdict how hard it was to carry out its orders. Given the economic imbroglio, the court’s verdict to regulate the sugar prices fell flat on its face and could not be implemented. Now the LHC’s remarks forbidding the president’s political activities are as hard to implement as was the case of sugar prices. The judiciary’s hard fought for independence also comes into question when such remarks are issued.
Comments are closed.