Sawal Yeh Hai | Maria Memon | ARY News | 11th August 2023
#BarristerAliZafar #analysis #supremecourt #pdmgovt #cjp #irfanqadir
(Current Affairs)
Host:
- Maria Memon
Guests:
- Barrister Ali Zafar (Lawyer)
- Irfan Qadir (Lawyer)
- Shah Mahmood Qureshi PTI
Legal Expert Barrister Ali Zafar's analysis on Supreme court's verdict
"New CJP of SC will reject this verdict", Legal Expert Irfan Qadir breaks big news
''Andesha tha Chairman PTI ko mansoobay ke tehat..," Shah Mahmood Qureshi ne ahem baat batadi
(Current Affairs)
Host:
- Maria Memon
Guests:
- Barrister Ali Zafar (Lawyer)
- Irfan Qadir (Lawyer)
- Shah Mahmood Qureshi PTI
Legal Expert Barrister Ali Zafar's analysis on Supreme court's verdict
"New CJP of SC will reject this verdict", Legal Expert Irfan Qadir breaks big news
''Andesha tha Chairman PTI ko mansoobay ke tehat..," Shah Mahmood Qureshi ne ahem baat batadi
Transcript
00:00 Assalam-o-Alaikum, I am Maria Meem and today's top stories is a big decision of Supreme Court
00:16 which has come out regarding review judgment.
00:19 Parliament has passed this bill and today Supreme Court has declared it as a wrong.
00:23 We will talk about this in the first semester of the program.
00:25 After that, the search for the Minister of Finance is going on.
00:27 President has written a letter to the Prime Minister.
00:30 Prime Minister says, what is the hurry? We will agree on the name.
00:33 Let's see whether this political crisis gets deeper or political parties find a solution soon.
00:39 After that, Murano's Aashish, there are only problems for poor people, middle class.
00:44 How is that?
00:45 In the last part of the program, I will show you that in Lahore,
00:47 energy crisis is still there in hospitals.
00:50 But the priorities of Ashrafia are completely different.
00:53 Let's talk about the Supreme Court's decision.
00:55 The detailed decision of Supreme Court's review of judgment order has been said.
01:01 The court says that this is a contradiction with the law.
01:05 Parliament cannot legislate in the sphere of Supreme Court's power.
01:09 Parliament knows that appeal and second opinion are two different things.
01:14 There is no objection in the Supreme Court's decision on the sphere of second opinion.
01:18 Supreme Court Review Act is beyond the power of Parliament to legislate.
01:22 It is a fixed principle that a simple law cannot change or add to the constitution.
01:27 Review and Judgment Act was made in such a way that the constitution is intended to be reformed.
01:32 The change in the Supreme Court rules is against the freedom of the court.
01:36 If the right to appeal is given under this law, then a new wave of case will emerge.
01:41 Silence will start coming from the Supreme Court.
01:44 Without keeping this in mind, the decisions that have been given have been implemented.
01:49 Review of Judgment is clearly a contradiction with the law.
01:53 It is not possible to declare this law as in accordance with the law.
01:57 Supreme Court Review of Judgment and Orders Act is declared invalid.
02:03 What was this Act?
02:05 We saw that it is passed in May and then it is presented in the Senate.
02:11 It is also approved from there.
02:13 On 29th May, President Ambedkar signs on it.
02:15 Then this Act becomes functional.
02:18 But today, the Supreme Court has made it invalid.
02:20 What was this Act?
02:21 What were its main points?
02:22 Let us quickly give you a refresher course.
02:24 The appeal against the Supreme Court decision can be made within 60 days of approval.
02:29 These were the original points of this Act.
02:32 The divorce of the Act will be based on the previous decisions under Article 184(3).
02:37 The number of judges present in the Judgment Bench will be more than the number of judges present in the Judgment Bench.
02:43 The Judges who give the decision will not be a part of the Judgment Bench.
02:47 The judge will be allowed to appoint a lawyer of his choice in the Review Petition.
02:51 When this Act was passed, there was a chatter that the Supreme Court decisions have political implications on the Prime Minister and the political class.
03:01 The court has discussed the appropriate things in the court.
03:09 But we have to see whether the people who are under threat after the decision are on the intent, the method or the political use of the Act.
03:17 The government's response was very predictable.
03:19 Obviously, when the bill was drafted, the people of the government,
03:25 President Tadir Sahib, and his biggest staunch proponent, Irfan Qadir Sahib,
03:32 both expressed disappointment when this bill was declared invalid.
03:36 Let's listen to their reaction.
03:40 The Parliament has the right to legislate.
03:43 It is being legislated so that the Parliament cannot re-enact it.
03:50 Mian Nawaz Sharif and the other people who were denied the right to vote,
03:57 all of them have been granted the right to vote after 5 years.
04:06 So, there is no impact on Mian Nawaz Sharif's case.
04:10 It is contrary to the law.
04:14 It is a wrong decision politically.
04:15 The bench that has been constituted is also wrong.
04:19 The PM has responded.
04:23 Khawaja Saad Rafiq has said that the next decision will be taken by the Parliament.
04:26 Because there are many questions on the timing of this decision.
04:29 The next day, the Parliament will be held to decide.
04:36 The Parliament should not be able to negotiate this matter.
04:39 That is why the PM is raising questions on this decision.
04:42 The legal experts who spoke to us said that the bill cannot be substituted for a constitutional amendment.
04:49 So, it had to be passed on technical grounds.
04:52 What do the legal experts say about this?
04:55 There should be a judiciary that has a final judgment.
04:59 Otherwise, the case will continue for life.
05:01 You cannot amend the law.
05:04 They tried to make a law and amend the provision of the law.
05:10 I think this was not right in the eyes of the law.
05:13 It was right to say that if the government wants to change,
05:17 then the next government will come and make a constitutional amendment.
05:22 The Supreme Court prevailed that this is an attack on the independence of the judiciary.
05:28 And this is an interference in the decisive powers of the judiciary.
05:32 If the amendment had to be passed, it could have been brought as a constitutional amendment.
05:37 This cannot be done under a normal act of Parliament.
05:42 Before the program, we have with us Barister Ali Zafar,
05:46 Lahore's Chief Justice, Sirfan Qadir, former Attorney General,
05:48 former Special Envoy for the Law and Intervention.
05:50 Mr. Ali Zafar, let's start with you.
05:52 The decision of the PTI and the point of view of the lawyers.
05:57 We have also heard the disappointment of the previous government.
06:02 The issue is about timing.
06:04 Timing is very peculiar.
06:06 Let's first address the elephant in the room.
06:08 We will talk about the point of the decision.
06:10 Assembly is held tomorrow.
06:12 Today, this decision is presented.
06:14 Isn't the timing strange, Sir?
06:19 Yes, Ali Zafar.
06:20 Yes, thank you.
06:24 Before I answer your question directly,
06:29 I would like to state in simple words what this decision is.
06:34 The decision is very simple.
06:36 It says that giving the power of appeal is the right of the Parliament.
06:43 Parliament can do it.
06:45 It is a good thing.
06:46 I support it too.
06:49 But the procedure is also mentioned in the bill.
06:53 If a bill has to be amended, it cannot be done through the usual legislation.
07:01 Parliament is bound to pass a bill with a two-third majority and amend it.
07:13 Since the bill was not amended, the court said that this legislation is against the law.
07:20 If the Parliament has to give the right of appeal, it can do it through the amendment of the bill.
07:27 As far as timing is concerned, it is a clear issue.
07:31 Timing does not matter.
07:33 If the decision had been made 10 days earlier, the Parliament could not have amended it.
07:39 The Parliament has to accept it.
07:43 There are thousands of laws that the Supreme Court of Pakistan has declared invalid for some reason.
07:49 The Parliament has to accept it because the law says that if any law is against the law,
07:58 the Supreme Court has the right to declare it invalid.
08:03 Let me take you to the background.
08:09 We have Irfan Qadir with us.
08:11 We will talk about your background.
08:14 You said that you did not have any problem with the timing.
08:17 If the Parliament has to accept the law, there were many incidents in 53 days.
08:22 But since the assembly was held after the assembly,
08:25 you got a chance to make a political statement regarding this judgment.
08:30 I asked this question because I thought you did not have any problem with it.
08:34 I did not have any problem with it.
08:40 As I said, if the Parliament had made the decision 10 days earlier,
08:45 the Parliament could have done nothing.
08:49 The Parliament could have amended the law.
08:53 But the majority of the government did not have the power to amend the law.
08:58 Otherwise, they would have done it.
09:00 Even if the Parliament had been there, the law could not have been amended.
09:03 Irfan Qadir, the way the bill is passed,
09:07 the debate between the courts, politics and the Parliament is obvious.
09:12 We do not need to give any example to explain it.
09:16 Everything is in front of everyone. Everyone knows it.
09:19 When you were bringing this amendment,
09:22 when this act was being presented,
09:24 there was a chance to appeal to the political class.
09:32 The point of view that was raised first,
09:35 after that, Nawaz Sharif, Jahangir Tareen,
09:38 are there no chances to challenge their disqualification after this amendment?
09:47 The legal status of this decision is nothing.
09:51 Why, sir? The Chief Justice has given this to the Supreme Court.
09:54 The Chief Justice and the judges have been legally defeated today.
10:02 And they have accepted this defeat.
10:04 Because this law, which is being called against the law,
10:10 and this kind of amendment can be done through the law,
10:13 there is nothing like that in this law.
10:16 This law is only one-sided.
10:18 And to strike down this one-sided law,
10:21 the Supreme Court would have needed one paragraph,
10:24 two paragraphs, three paragraphs, five pages, ten pages, thirty pages.
10:31 There was something right in this law,
10:33 which was written for them to write eighty pages,
10:35 and they tried to bring down the law,
10:38 but they could not.
10:40 Now let's see what the law is.
10:42 What is said in the law?
10:44 In the law, it is said that the scope of review in the Supreme Court rules was very narrow,
10:50 it was wrong, and it was not in accordance with the principles of fair trial.
10:54 Hence, the scope of review was enlarged.
10:57 And the rules of the Supreme Court are written in the law,
11:00 it is written in the constitution that they will be in accordance with the law of the Parliament.
11:04 So, the Chief Justice and the judges are taking these rules very seriously,
11:08 as if they are above the law of the Parliament,
11:12 and they are equating it with the constitution.
11:15 And the concept of the Chief Justice is that
11:18 he feels that the law is knocking on his door.
11:21 Why would the law knock on your door?
11:23 You are subject to the law,
11:25 you are subject to the law,
11:27 and you are not subject to the law.
11:29 Similarly, it is written in the law that the judges will not listen to the review,
11:33 the larger bench will listen to it.
11:35 What was the non-lawful thing in this?
11:37 In fact, this is also according to the principle of fair trial,
11:39 that one should not be a judge in his own cause.
11:42 We have seen in the past that the Supreme Court has made wrong decisions,
11:45 and perpetuated them,
11:47 when the review was applied to the judges.
11:50 And then there was another big drawback in the rule of the Supreme Court,
11:53 and that was that the same lawyer was presented who had lost the case.
11:57 So, it is written in this law that the lawyer can also be a judge.
12:01 Mr. Irfan Qadir, I have read all the points you have just told.
12:04 There is not a single point on which anyone has an objection.
12:08 I think it is based on the principles of justice, PMLN, People's Party.
12:11 Sir, it is a consensus.
12:12 There is no objection.
12:14 Sir, even in the Supreme Court decision, they did not object to the content of the ruling.
12:18 They talked about its methodology and legal procedure.
12:22 No, the methodology was correct.
12:23 That it could have been done through a legal procedure.
12:25 There is an objection to this.
12:26 Look, the whole of the methodology has been written wrong in the Supreme Court.
12:29 It is written legally wrong.
12:32 It is written wrong from a logical perspective.
12:34 It is written wrong from a moral aspect.
12:36 And they have constituted a bench of their own accord.
12:38 That is, a law was made that the Chief Justice is an individual,
12:42 and that he should not make benches of his own accord.
12:44 The Supreme Court judges were being told not to have a one-man show.
12:48 And then they could not satisfy that law by modifying it.
12:53 Sir, can anyone legally challenge this?
12:55 Or this must be a legal action.
12:57 Because what will happen if the Supreme Court…
12:58 No, no, this order is to be ignored.
13:00 This order is to be ignored.
13:02 This is the new thing of the Supreme Court.
13:04 The day the Chief Justice comes, the day he takes over,
13:07 the day all these reviews will be filed,
13:09 he will ignore this order.
13:11 Sir, this is a very dangerous precedent you are setting, sir,
13:14 when it comes to elections…
13:15 No, I am not setting.
13:16 The Supreme Court has already violated the Constitution.
13:18 Sir, this means that tomorrow, any Supreme Court…
13:20 I am not setting a precedent.
13:21 Sorry, let me rephrase it.
13:23 The system is setting.
13:26 Let me rephrase it.
13:27 Yes, this is fine.
13:28 This, I am saying.
13:29 You are absolutely right.
13:30 The system…
13:31 Absolutely, now you are right.
13:33 A very dangerous precedent is being set.
13:36 And that is why I said that these three judges are in the minority.
13:39 And I consider them to be a legal victim.
13:42 Sir, today you have these objections.
13:44 Tomorrow, if there is another Chief Justice,
13:46 but he is in the minority,
13:47 but the decision is right,
13:49 and then it is said that we do not accept this because he is in the minority,
13:52 then this door will never close.
13:54 You are right that this decision is not right.
13:57 Please.
13:58 This is my argument that this decision is not right.
14:01 The CM is violating the Supreme Court's orders,
14:04 the Constitution,
14:06 and the law,
14:07 and the Constitution.
14:09 Everything is irrational.
14:11 Okay, we should ignore this order, Mr. Ali Zafar.
14:14 First, he ignored the order regarding the election
14:16 because there was controversy regarding the bench.
14:18 We should ignore this order too.
14:20 So, I think after this,
14:21 the Supreme Court's own legitimacy,
14:24 its struggle to get its decisions passed is separate.
14:27 We have now gone on a slippery slope.
14:30 Today, there is this Chief Justice,
14:31 tomorrow there will be another Chief Justice.
14:33 The government of that time,
14:34 the set up of that time,
14:35 says that we will ignore this order.
14:37 So, this is an imbalance of power overall.
14:41 Look, this is a very strange thing
14:49 that you say that the Supreme Court's order,
14:52 I do not agree with it,
14:55 I think it is a wrong order,
14:56 so I do not agree with it.
14:58 If this becomes the precedent,
15:00 and if the governments start doing this,
15:02 then you should put aside the Constitution,
15:06 and close the Supreme Court.
15:08 And those who have the power,
15:12 should continue to run the government.
15:13 The people will continue to be oppressed.
15:15 This cannot happen in a country.
15:17 There is no permission in the Parliament,
15:21 no permission in the Constitution,
15:22 no permission in the civil society.
15:25 Neither you will accept it,
15:26 nor will I accept it.
15:27 So, it is a wish that we do not implement it.
15:30 But look, what is the issue?
15:32 There is a need to understand the issue.
15:34 The issue is that,
15:36 the Constitution says that
15:38 when the Supreme Court of Pakistan
15:40 gives a judgment under Article 184(3),
15:43 then you can only file a review against it,
15:47 you cannot file an appeal against it.
15:51 This is what the Constitution says.
15:52 Now, if you want to change it,
15:55 you want to change the review,
15:58 and instead of the review,
16:00 you want to say that you have the power to appeal,
16:03 then you have the right to do so,
16:05 the Parliament is supreme,
16:07 but it is written in the Constitution
16:09 that you have to make a constitutional amendment,
16:12 then you have to change the Constitution.
16:14 If the Constitution says that an appeal cannot be made,
16:16 and you want to file an appeal,
16:17 then you can amend it.
16:19 Our Constitution was of 1956,
16:22 our Constitution was of 1962,
16:25 and our Constitution was of 1973.
16:27 All three of them say that
16:29 only a review can be made,
16:31 not an appeal.
16:32 Till date, the Parliament has not changed it.
16:35 The Parliament had a two-third majority,
16:38 many governments,
16:40 they did not amend the Constitution.
16:42 But what happened was that
16:44 a judgment came from the Supreme Court,
16:47 and in the judgment it was said that
16:49 you have to have the elections done in 90 days.
16:51 When a review was filed against it,
16:54 since the review is very limited,
16:57 the government saw that
16:59 this review would be dismissed.
17:01 The government quickly made a bill
17:04 of one page,
17:05 and said that we will give the power of appeal.
17:08 When this matter came to the Senate,
17:11 no one had even read the law yet,
17:14 so it was said to the Chairman,
17:17 by the government ministers,
17:19 that you have to pass this.
17:21 I stood up and said,
17:24 that the parliamentary method is
17:26 that there should be a debate on this,
17:28 and I want to tell all the Senators
17:31 that this amendment is coming,
17:34 it can be amended through the Constitution.
17:37 It is a good thing to appeal,
17:40 but it is a methodical amendment.
17:43 You should not pass this bill,
17:45 you should debate on it.
17:47 If you pass this,
17:49 then in 15 days,
17:51 the Supreme Court will declare this law as illegal.
17:53 Because the Parliament and the Supreme Court
17:55 are both prohibited by the Constitution.
17:57 But my case was not accepted,
17:59 and when the debate took place in the Supreme Court,
18:02 I said that this method is wrong.
18:08 The Supreme Court has accepted it and decided,
18:12 that if any government wants to appeal,
18:15 then it can pass this amendment.
18:17 Let me tell you the second reason for this.
18:20 There was another malefied reason
18:22 for passing this law,
18:24 which was bulldozed very quickly.
18:26 And that was that some people,
18:28 Mr. Nawaz Sharif is also included in this,
18:31 because the Supreme Court declared them as unlawful,
18:34 so they tried to give the right
18:37 that those people against whom the appeal,
18:40 the review has been dismissed,
18:43 they also have a right to appeal.
18:45 But Ali Zafar, the way you have put it,
18:47 today Azam Tariq Sahib said,
18:49 if I can take Irfan Qadir's point of view,
18:52 that if this decision is not passed,
18:55 the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif,
18:57 Jahangir Tareen and other political leaders
18:59 will not affect the appeal.
19:01 In the election act,
19:03 their punishment has already been
19:05 imposed for 5 years,
19:07 and it has been relapsed.
19:09 So Irfan Qadir,
19:11 after this decision,
19:13 the first thought that there will be a difference
19:15 in the punishment of Nawaz Sharif,
19:17 will there be a difference?
19:19 Will he also be given the right to appeal?
19:21 No, there will be no difference
19:23 because Nawaz Sharif's name,
19:25 Ali, will be no more.
19:27 That is not an issue.
19:29 The second issue is that
19:31 the case of Panama,
19:33 which was convicted,
19:35 without this law,
19:37 Mariam Sahib was not allowed
19:39 to go to the court.
19:41 And the same facts have been
19:43 applied on Niaz Sahib,
19:45 which are not jurisdictional facts,
19:47 which can prove corruption.
19:49 And this is also applied
19:51 in Tareen Sahib's case?
19:53 Yes, this is the case of Jahangir Tareen.
19:55 So there will be no difference
19:57 in their faith with this law.
19:59 But in any case,
20:01 the Supreme Court has tried,
20:03 first of all,
20:05 I don't think the Supreme Court
20:07 has legally constituted this case.
20:09 The first thing is that
20:11 in the case of military courts,
20:13 Justice Faiz Isa and
20:15 Justice Tariq Masood have said
20:17 that when you make benches
20:19 of your own free will,
20:21 it will be illegal
20:23 because the law says
20:25 that the first three senior judges
20:27 will do it.
20:29 And that has not been decided.
20:31 That matter is pending
20:33 and it has been decided here.
20:35 And these three judges
20:37 of the Supreme Court
20:39 have brought themselves
20:41 to the streets.
20:43 So what will happen now?
20:45 What will happen now?
20:47 Will the next Parliament
20:49 come and do its legislation?
20:51 Will you see the correctional measures
20:53 or any changes in it through
20:55 the next tenure of the
20:57 current Supreme Court?
20:59 The next tenure of the current Supreme Court
21:01 will rectify all these mistakes
21:03 because these three judges
21:05 have done political engineering.
21:07 These three judges
21:09 have been
21:11 coming to the same side
21:13 and these decisions
21:15 were all
21:17 towards the same political
21:19 backbone.
21:21 The changes that will come
21:23 as a result of this case
21:25 will come from the next tenure
21:27 of the Supreme Court,
21:29 that is, the new Chief Justice
21:31 Saad Rafiq and other
21:33 political figures will come
21:35 and reconsider this matter
21:37 in the next Parliament.
21:39 We will go on break.
21:41 We will be back with
21:43 Shah Mahmood Qureshi
21:45 and we will talk to him
21:47 about the decision-making
21:49 process and the election campaign.
21:51 We will try to get
21:53 answers from him.
21:55 We will be back after the break.
21:57 Welcome back.
21:59 Thank you for joining us.
22:01 Pakistan Tariq Insaaf
22:03 is fighting a battle
22:05 for political survival
22:07 after 9th May.
22:09 Your party's leader is in jail.
22:11 There are many questions
22:13 about the political setup
22:15 and election campaign.
22:17 First of all, I have a question
22:19 that have you met Mr. Khan?
22:21 Did the administration
22:23 give you a chance to meet him?
22:25 Not yet. I have submitted a request
22:27 to the administration
22:29 and the court
22:31 to meet him.
22:33 We need to get
22:35 guidance on many issues.
22:37 We should get
22:39 guidance on many issues.
22:41 You were expecting
22:43 that you might have to go to jail.
22:45 Did you have any
22:47 planned campaign?
22:49 Did you have any plans
22:51 for ticket distribution?
22:53 Did you have any plans
22:55 for ticket distribution?
22:57 Did you have any plans
22:59 for ticket distribution?
23:01 Did you have any plans
23:03 for ticket distribution?
23:05 Did you have any plans
23:07 for ticket distribution?
23:09 Did you have any plans
23:11 for ticket distribution?
23:13 Did you have any plans
23:15 for ticket distribution?
23:17 Did you have any plans
23:19 for ticket distribution?
23:21 Did you have any plans
23:23 for ticket distribution?
23:25 Did you have any plans
23:27 for ticket distribution?
23:29 Did you have any plans
23:31 for ticket distribution?
23:33 Did you have any plans
23:35 for ticket distribution?
23:37 Did you have any plans
23:39 for ticket distribution?
23:41 Did you have any plans
23:43 for ticket distribution?
23:45 Did you have any plans
23:47 for ticket distribution?
23:49 Did you have any plans
23:51 for ticket distribution?
23:53 Did you have any plans
23:55 for ticket distribution?
23:57 Did you have any plans
23:59 for ticket distribution?
24:01 Did you have any plans
24:03 for ticket distribution?
24:05 Did you have any plans
24:07 for ticket distribution?
24:09 Did you have any plans
24:11 for ticket distribution?
24:13 Did you have any plans
24:15 for ticket distribution?
24:17 Did you have any plans
24:19 for ticket distribution?
24:21 Did you have any plans
24:23 for ticket distribution?
24:25 Did you have any plans
24:27 for ticket distribution?
24:29 Did you have any plans
24:31 for ticket distribution?
24:33 Did you have any plans
24:35 for ticket distribution?
24:37 Did you have any plans
24:39 for ticket distribution?
24:41 Did you have any plans
24:43 for ticket distribution?
24:45 Did you have any plans
24:47 for ticket distribution?
24:49 Did you have any plans
24:51 for ticket distribution?
24:53 Did you have any plans
24:55 for ticket distribution?
24:57 Did you have any plans
24:59 for ticket distribution?
25:01 Did you have any plans
25:03 for ticket distribution?
25:05 Did you have any plans
25:07 for ticket distribution?
25:09 Did you have any plans
25:11 for ticket distribution?
25:13 Did you have any plans
25:15 for ticket distribution?
25:17 Did you have any plans
25:19 for ticket distribution?
25:21 Did you have any plans
25:23 for ticket distribution?
25:25 Did you have any plans
25:27 for ticket distribution?
25:29 Did you have any plans
25:31 for ticket distribution?
25:33 Did you have any plans
25:35 for ticket distribution?
25:37 Did you have any plans
25:39 for ticket distribution?
25:41 Did you have any plans
25:43 for ticket distribution?
25:45 Did you have any plans
25:47 for ticket distribution?
25:49 Did you have any plans
25:51 for ticket distribution?
25:53 Did you have any plans
25:55 for ticket distribution?
25:57 Did you have any plans
25:59 for ticket distribution?
26:01 Did you have any plans
26:03 for ticket distribution?
26:05 Did you have any plans
26:07 for ticket distribution?
26:09 Did you have any plans
26:11 for ticket distribution?
26:13 Did you have any plans
26:15 for ticket distribution?
26:17 Did you have any plans
26:19 for ticket distribution?
26:21 Did you have any plans
26:23 for ticket distribution?
26:25 Did you have any plans
26:27 for ticket distribution?
26:29 Did you have any plans
26:31 for ticket distribution?
26:33 Did you have any plans
26:35 for ticket distribution?
26:37 Did you have any plans
26:39 for ticket distribution?
26:41 Did you have any plans
26:43 for ticket distribution?
26:45 Did you have any plans
26:47 for ticket distribution?
26:49 Did you have any plans
26:51 for ticket distribution?
26:53 Did you have any plans
26:55 for ticket distribution?
26:57 Did you have any plans
26:59 for ticket distribution?
27:01 Did you have any plans
27:03 for ticket distribution?
27:05 Did you have any plans
27:07 for ticket distribution?
27:09 Did you have any plans
27:11 for ticket distribution?
27:13 Did you have any plans
27:15 for ticket distribution?
27:17 Did you have any plans
27:19 for ticket distribution?
27:21 Did you have any plans
27:23 for ticket distribution?
27:25 Did you have any plans
27:27 for ticket distribution?
27:29 Did you have any plans
27:31 for ticket distribution?
27:33 Did you have any plans
27:35 for ticket distribution?
27:37 Did you have any plans
27:39 for ticket distribution?
27:41 Did you have any plans
27:43 for ticket distribution?
27:45 Did you have any plans
27:47 for ticket distribution?
27:49 Did you have any plans
27:51 for ticket distribution?
27:53 Did you have any plans
27:55 for ticket distribution?
27:57 Did you have any plans
27:59 for ticket distribution?
28:01 Did you have any plans
28:03 for ticket distribution?
28:05 Did you have any plans
28:07 for ticket distribution?
28:09 Did you have any plans
28:11 for ticket distribution?
28:13 Did you have any plans
28:15 for ticket distribution?
28:17 Did you have any plans
28:19 for ticket distribution?
28:21 Did you have any plans
28:23 for ticket distribution?
28:25 Did you have any plans
28:27 for ticket distribution?
28:29 Did you have any plans
28:31 for ticket distribution?
28:33 Did you have any plans
28:35 for ticket distribution?
28:37 Did you have any plans
28:39 for ticket distribution?
28:41 Did you have any plans
28:43 for ticket distribution?
28:45 Did you have any plans
28:47 for ticket distribution?
28:49 Did you have any plans
28:51 for ticket distribution?
28:53 Did you have any plans
28:55 for ticket distribution?
28:57 Did you have any plans
28:59 for ticket distribution?
29:01 Did you have any plans
29:03 for ticket distribution?
29:05 Did you have any plans
29:07 for ticket distribution?
29:09 Did you have any plans
29:11 for ticket distribution?
29:13 Did you have any plans
29:15 for ticket distribution?
29:17 Did you have any plans
29:19 for ticket distribution?
29:21 Did you have any plans
29:23 for ticket distribution?
29:25 Did you have any plans
29:27 for ticket distribution?
29:29 Did you have any plans
29:31 for ticket distribution?
29:33 Did you have any plans
29:35 for ticket distribution?
29:37 Did you have any plans
29:39 for ticket distribution?
29:41 Did you have any plans
29:43 for ticket distribution?
29:45 Did you have any plans
29:47 for ticket distribution?
29:49 Did you have any plans
29:51 for ticket distribution?
29:53 Did you have any plans
29:55 for ticket distribution?
29:57 Did you have any plans
29:59 for ticket distribution?
30:01 Did you have any plans
30:03 for ticket distribution?
30:05 Did you have any plans
30:07 for ticket distribution?
30:09 There are other issues
30:11 related to this issue.
30:13 The Jamaat is going
30:15 through a process
30:17 and the burnt bridges
30:19 need to be rebuilt.
30:21 The opposition is ready
30:23 to talk to you.
30:25 Mr. Bilawal said
30:27 that he will have
30:29 to meet the other
30:31 Jamaats and discuss
30:33 the situation.
30:35 How long will it take
30:37 to rebuild the burnt bridges?
30:39 Is it possible
30:41 to talk practically?
30:43 It depends on the issues.
30:45 It depends on the issues.
30:47 If you are in agreement
30:49 with the issues,
30:51 if the other Jamaats
30:53 follow the constitution
30:55 and follow the democratic
30:57 traditions,
30:59 and if they have
31:01 always been
31:03 in agreement with
31:05 freedom of expression,
31:07 and if they have
31:09 always been in agreement
31:11 with the constitution,
31:13 then they should
31:15 remain in agreement
31:17 with the principles.
31:19 If they remain in agreement
31:21 with the principles,
31:23 then there can be
31:25 a dialogue.
31:27 But there is no
31:29 religious dialogue.
31:31 Dialogue does not mean
31:33 that you can
31:35 support each other
31:37 in your commonalities.
31:39 You can present
31:41 your views to the people.
31:43 Your Jamaat
31:45 had decided
31:47 that it will not sit with the thieves.
31:49 But before going to the last
31:51 address, Mr. Khan
31:53 invited everyone.
31:55 Is there a shift there?
31:57 Do you feel that
31:59 you have to talk to the politicians
32:01 about the issues?
32:03 You have been a proponent
32:05 of dialogue.
32:07 Look, it is not
32:09 a matter of five fingers.
32:11 Every Jamaat has serious people.
32:13 Every Jamaat has
32:15 reasonable people
32:17 who like reasonableness.
32:19 Every Jamaat has people
32:21 who think that the country
32:23 is in a very serious situation.
32:25 If we have to give the country
32:27 political stability,
32:29 if we have to take care of the economy,
32:31 then we have to find a way.
32:33 We have to open
32:35 closed doors.
32:37 We have to create
32:39 a space for each other in our minds.
32:41 Sir, how will these closed doors open?
32:43 It is very strictly closed now.
32:45 The door is locked.
32:47 How will it open?
32:49 Look, there are some
32:51 foundations to open
32:53 closed doors.
32:55 We think that the strongest foundation
32:57 is Pakistan.
32:59 Keeping Pakistan in front,
33:01 the doors can be opened
33:03 by listening to the political discussions.
33:05 Sir, today for the KTA setup,
33:07 Raja Riaz and
33:09 the Prime Minister will
33:11 discuss.
33:13 In the assembly,
33:15 they say that the PTI has left the space.
33:17 Otherwise, you are also a part of this process.
33:19 So, in hindsight,
33:21 in this whole next phase,
33:23 you are not participating
33:25 as a stakeholder.
33:27 In hindsight, was this
33:29 a wise decision?
33:31 Maria, if we were allowed
33:33 to go back to the assembly,
33:35 as the court said,
33:37 if we were allowed
33:39 to go back to the assembly,
33:41 then today
33:43 in the country,
33:45 there would be
33:47 an actual
33:49 constitutional dispute.
33:51 At present, the
33:53 constitutional dispute
33:55 is the government's
33:57 hand-holding.
33:59 Hopefully,
34:01 when the date is written,
34:03 then somewhere,
34:05 the decisions that were played
34:07 with the whole system,
34:09 politically,
34:11 the political parties did not play their role.
34:13 In that too, if this 1.5 years
34:15 is spent with someone,
34:17 then the political parties will have
34:19 a very big share.
34:21 We will talk about the priorities of the government,
34:23 what people have to do to get treatment,
34:25 there is no electricity in hospitals.
34:27 We will talk about this during the break.