• 3 months ago
#TheReporters #ImranKhan #PTI #ReservedSeats #ElectionCommission #SupremeCourt #QaziFeazIsa #JusticeMansoorAliShah

Follow the ARY News channel on WhatsApp: https://bit.ly/46e5HzY

Subscribe to our channel and press the bell icon for latest news updates: http://bit.ly/3e0SwKP

ARY News is a leading Pakistani news channel that promises to bring you factual and timely international stories and stories about Pakistan, sports, entertainment, and business, amid others.

Official Facebook: https://www.fb.com/arynewsasia

Official Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/arynewsofficial

Official Instagram: https://instagram.com/arynewstv

Website: https://arynews.tv

Watch ARY NEWS LIVE: http://live.arynews.tv

Listen Live: http://live.arynews.tv/audio

Listen Top of the hour Headlines, Bulletins & Programs: https://soundcloud.com/arynewsofficial
#ARYNews

ARY News Official YouTube Channel.
For more videos, subscribe to our channel and for suggestions please use the comment section.
Transcript
00:00Thank you very much. You have been watching this matter from day one.
00:04Obviously, this is a legal and a legal matter. We have to take advice from people like you.
00:10I hope by now you have seen the report that the Election Commission has submitted to the Chief Minister.
00:20Because they have quoted about nine different precedents.
00:25They have presented a case law which proves that the Parliament has the power.
00:32The legislature can do this. If there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it can affect it.
00:42Now tell me, has it gone back to the Supreme Court?
00:47In common sense, it is said that it has gone back to the Supreme Court.
00:51With an opinion, the Supreme Court should know and this decision should be taken.
00:55Now, what will happen in your view?
00:57In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Thank you very much, Mr. Gumban.
01:01Look, they don't want to act on this.
01:05Look, the decision of 12th July was very clear.
01:08It was written in it that these 49 seats belong to the PTI and these 11 judges held them.
01:14For the rest, you can take the affidavit within 15 days.
01:17And if they tell you that they belong to the PTI, then you can issue this notification in their favour.
01:24So, there was no malice in this, nor was there any mischief in this.
01:28But they said that if you still want clarification, then you can send us to the Chamber.
01:32It will be seen in the Chamber. We will give you clarification.
01:35And to delay this, they did this again.
01:37Look, I will tell you that a review has also been launched on 30th.
01:42And in that, if the right is given to vote for a minority, then all these things...
01:48Mr. Abbas Zubair, we will do a little sidestep.
01:51But the question here is that the argument of the Election Commission is that if the decision comes on 12th July,
01:57in the same month...
01:59Why didn't they implement it?
02:00No, sir, they are saying that we have put a lot of thought into it.
02:05And on 24th, we did a partial implementation.
02:08And since they are saying that in the opinion of the Election Commission,
02:11since the infrastructure of an intra-party election has not been done by a party,
02:15then what should we do?
02:17On 25th, for clarification...
02:19I am ahead, sir.
02:20On 25th, for clarification, they put a letter, a CMA, or put an application.
02:24Now the question is that from 25th July onwards,
02:29this will be amended on 7th, 8th August,
02:32but the clarification comes very late.
02:35It comes on 14th September.
02:37So why so delay on the part of the majority bench?
02:41At that time, clarification should have been given to them immediately,
02:44when this letter was written by the Election Commission.
02:47I don't know.
02:48Only those can tell who had to give clarification to the judge.
02:53But one thing is clear.
02:54It was not written anywhere in that order on 12th July
02:57that until clarification is not given, you will not implement this order.
03:00Look, you have to implement the order of the Supreme Court under Article 190.
03:06And in clarification, it means that until clarification comes, it stays.
03:11No, they did not have to do it.
03:12You would have done it.
03:13If clarification had come, it would have come against it.
03:15You would have denotified it.
03:16Look, there is nothing in this.
03:17This order has to be implemented on 12th July.
03:20The order is for 12th July.
03:21Explanation can clarify that order.
03:24It cannot overwrite it.
03:25It cannot overrule it.
03:26It can be in the review.
03:28If it happened, it can be in it.
03:29Second thing.
03:30The reasons that have come.
03:33Reasons are not an order.
03:35There are only reasons.
03:37The order is for 12th July.
03:38It was not implemented.
03:39And look, the rights of those 80 people were created at that time.
03:44And their rights were created.
03:47Now, look, the amendment act comes in August.
03:52Do you apply it retrospectively?
03:56And say, yes, it will be implemented in this way.
03:59Can you interpret a judicial order?
04:02Which explains the different articles of the law.
04:06You can overwrite it with an additional law.
04:09You cannot do the order of the Supreme Court.
04:11Look, the retrospective and the 12 that they have given.
04:15I have not seen the application.
04:17I will request you to WhatsApp it to me.
04:19So I will see.
04:21But look, the basic principle of retrospective operation law.
04:26That with any retrospective operation.
04:28You cannot take the fundamental rights of the vested right.
04:32And these are the judgments.
04:33One thing they can do is that.
04:35If it declares to the law that this is wrong of the Supreme Court.
04:38Like an ordinance of income tax.
04:40In the law of income tax, it says.
04:42This is in violation of the law.
04:44Then you can point out to the court.
04:46Absolutely right.
04:47There are many more questions that we are talking to you.
04:49We will continue.
04:51Mr. Nakvi wants to ask you a question.
04:53Mr. Nakvi, you can ask a question.
04:54Mr. Zubairi is present.
04:56I just want to ask Mr. Zubairi a small thing.
04:59For my own clarity.
05:00Yes, please.
05:01The argument that Mr. Zubairi has just built.
05:03It proves that those who have specific rights should get it.
05:07And there is no doubt that those who have specific rights should get it.
05:11Now I want to ask one question.
05:14Did the Supreme Court give a very straightforward decision?
05:16That these rights belong to the Sunni Unity Council.
05:19To save it from PTI.
05:21Why did this decision have to be so complicated?
05:24I want an answer to this.
05:26Okay, I'll add a little more to this.
05:30Mr. Nakvi asked a very legitimate question.
05:32We were talking about it yesterday.
05:34The fight started because PTI did not go.
05:41Sunni Unity Council had asked for seats.
05:44So how did PTI get it?
05:46Mr. Nakvi's opinion is that if Sunni Unity Council were the same people.
05:50They would have given it to them.
05:52This PTI identity was created again.
05:56Obviously, there were some concerns about it.
05:58Because of that, this dispute has arisen.
06:01Yes, Mr. Zubairi.
06:02Mr. Nakvi asked a very good question.
06:04I have answered it many times before on your program.
06:07Mr. Nakvi asked the same question last time.
06:09Mr. Nakvi, let me tell you one thing.
06:11You see, in the detailed reason, which I did not know.
06:15He said that PTI's application was also there when this case went on.
06:19Yes, yes, it is.
06:21Okay.
06:22But let me say the second thing.
06:24All 11 judges said that they joined the Sunni Unity.
06:30Now PTI, according to you, was not a party.
06:33Let's leave it.
06:34Their application was also not there, which was present in front of the court.
06:37Assume that it was not there.
06:39And Sunni Unity Council said that these are our seats.
06:41The court came to this conclusion that these seats were of PTI.
06:44And the fact that they were declared independent was wrong.
06:46All 11 judges said this, including the Chief Justice.
06:49And PTI did not need to make themselves independent.
06:53When the court can come to this conclusion, then how can it give the seats to SIC?
06:58See, this is the thing.
06:59They are saying that the mistake that the Election Commission did and the Peshawar High Court upholded it,
07:04it was wrong from the beginning.
07:05So they were not independent.
07:06But a sign was taken from them that it did not mean that they were not a party.
07:11Now they are saying that whether it was a registered party or not, the Supreme Court has finished it.
07:15Which you read in the application today and said that it was not a registered party.
07:18They say it themselves.
07:19They have written the letter themselves.
07:20And their order was in February.
07:23Absolutely right.
07:24Absolutely right.
07:25Mr. Nagvi, I will come to you again.
07:26You cannot overrule the order of the Supreme Court.
07:31This is not a ballot vote.
07:33But the Constitution of the National Assembly says that only those who are present in the National Assembly will get the designated seats.
07:38Others cannot get it.
07:39So this is an overriding law.
07:41Yes.
07:42Let's have a discussion with Mr. Chaudhary Ghansain.
07:46Mr. Chaudhary, you can ask questions and comment as well.
07:48This is a new thing.
07:51Now they are taking the constitution behind it.
07:53Yes, Mr. Chaudhary.
07:54Mr. Chaudhary, they are talking.
07:58I am saying that this is a new thing.
08:00Overriding.
08:01People were saying on TV yesterday that overriding the constitution is only the job of the Supreme Court.
08:06It is not overriding.
08:07They will say, do you like the Supreme Court or not?
08:10This is our jurisprudence.
08:11That is why this court is being finished.
08:13Mr. Chaudhary, the paragraph number 23 of the CMA filed by the Election Commission of Pakistan is in front of you.
08:23In this paragraph, they are explaining that there is a settled judicial precedent that once a judgment is made,
08:33if a decision is made on the basis of the constitution, then the Parliament cannot reverse the constitution.
08:39But if a judgment is made on the basis of a common law, then it has the right of retrospective effect.
08:49This can be done by the legislature and the parliament.
08:53Now, they are saying that they have presented some case law on this.
08:57They are saying that the legislature and the parliament have this right.
09:02You are right.
09:04Mr. Chaudhary, you also say strange things.
09:06No, sir. I am talking about the Election Commission.
09:08I am very surprised.
09:10The Election Commission has talked about minorities and women's rights which are given in the constitution.
09:16No, no. You are absolutely right.
09:19What they have said is absolutely right.
09:21But naturally, they are going ahead and hitting the stick at it.
09:24Your application is absolutely right.
09:26When the Supreme Court makes a judgment on the constitution,
09:28then it cannot be finished by a common law.
09:30Absolutely right.
09:31Yes, if the court says that a common law is wrong, then it can be corrected.
09:35The Parliament can also give it a retrospective effect.
09:37Absolutely right.
09:38They have the right to implement it from behind.
09:41But you cannot explain that they have interpreted Article 51.
09:45They have said that this was a wrong interpretation by the Election Commission.
09:47These seats were theirs and the reserve seats are theirs.
09:49So, it was the interpretation of Article 51.
09:52So, how can they change Section 104 or Section 66 and say that it is not extending any judgment of the court?
10:00This is exactly what they have said.
10:02Absolutely right. We got it.

Recommended