- PAT denies allegations that its demands are unconstitutional
- Says govt has failed to uphold Articles 3, 4, 9 and 32 to 38 of Constitution
In response to the questions raised by Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Raza Rabbani in a case pertaining to extra-constitutional steps and sit-ins on Islamabad’s Constitution Avenue, the Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) on Tuesday declared them as “hypothetical”.
PAT counsel Barrister Syed Ali submitted the response on behalf of the party.
Responding to Rabbani’s first question whether any political party or any other group could, at all, seek constitutional office-bearers to disengage from office under threat of violence, the reply stated that it was the right of every person to raise demands, including the resignation of any office-bearer in the government, be it prime minister or chief minister of any province.
“The resignation of the prime minister and chief minister are duly provided in the constitution in Article 91(6) and 130(6), hence there is nothing unconstitutional in demanding the resignation,” the PAT response said.
Answering Rabbani’s second question relating to whether a political leader could involve the Pakistan Army to achieve his or her objectives, the response denied any ‘unconstitutional objectives’ of PAT leadership and said: “The government asked the Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif to facilitate a solution. PAT welcomed it because the intention is to solve the problem but unfortunately the debate between the government’s cabinet members [whether it is facilitation, mediation or arbitration] spoiled this possibility.”
PAT also denied allegations which termed the party’s demands as unconstitutional, adding that the government had also failed to uphold Articles 3, 4, 9 and 32 to 38 of the Constitution.
In response to Rabbani’s third question pertaining to whether a political leader could misrepresent the support of the army for his/her cause in public or private communication, PAT’s reply said that their party had great respect for the country’s armed forces.
“The attempt to raise question about Pakistan Army has to be nipped in the bud as it is being unnecessarily tried to get the name of Pakistan Army involved in debate and discussion before this Court.”
Earlier on September 10, Raza Rabbani, one of the main architects of the 18th Amendment, had told the apex court that he was afraid certain unconstitutional measures might be in the offing, in the wake of the prevailing political situation.
When the chief justice had asked Rabbani whether he had any basis for his views, he replied that this view was based on experiences from the turbulent history of the country.
Considering the questions important in view of ongoing developments, the court had sought answers from the PTI and PAT counsel on these questions.
PTI had already submitted its response on September 15, stating that the party “will not support any unconstitutional measures”.
