"Supreme Court has exceeded its Authority in Interpreting Article 63-A of the Constitution" Murtaza Wahab
#kamranmurtaza #murtazawahab #bilawalbhutto #pmlngovt #juif #fazalurrehman #bilawalbhutto #supremecourt #qazifaezisa #constitutionalamendment
"Supreme Court has exceeded its Authority in Interpreting Article 63-A of the Constitution" Murtaza Wahab
"Supreme Court has exceeded its Authority in Interpreting Article 63-A of the Constitution" Murtaza Wahab
Category
đź—ž
NewsTranscript
00:00So, can it be said that your and the JUIF's stance on this amendment regarding the military courts was almost the same?
00:07You both felt that this should not be done?
00:09We say that the Supreme Court itself has decided on this.
00:12Stay on that.
00:13Stay on that. You should not divert it.
00:15This is one thing.
00:16And we had also convinced the government on this.
00:19So, this does not happen now?
00:20That we convinced the government that the absolute right should not be there.
00:23Absolutely agreed on this.
00:24That the absolute right should not be there. Judicial review should be there.
00:26So, it would be right to say that there will be no amendment regarding this?
00:32Yes.
00:33Let's move ahead.
00:34The decision of Article 63A,
00:36they gave the opinion that,
00:38we also think that this decision is wrong,
00:41but the decision should not be overturned through a constitutional amendment,
00:44it should be overturned through a review.
00:46Do you think that it should be overturned through a constitutional amendment?
00:49This is a very interesting question.
00:52I always believe that when we talk in confidence,
00:55it should not be done in a public manner.
00:58There was a very interesting discussion,
01:00and in that discussion,
01:01when Article 63A was mentioned,
01:03every political party in Pakistan,
01:05is in agreement on the fact that,
01:07the Supreme Court's decision on Article 63A,
01:10it was overturned through a constitutional amendment.
01:12The words that are written in the law,
01:14they are not obvious.
01:15You said that everyone is in agreement,
01:17but PTI is not in agreement.
01:19Leave that.
01:20PTI is a cricket team.
01:22We are talking about JUI.
01:24We are talking about JUI.
01:25Maulana Sahab is in agreement on this,
01:27his opinion is also in agreement.
01:29Kamran Murtaza Sahab himself says that,
01:31the Supreme Court's decision is wrong.
01:35Right?
01:36But he says that it should not be overturned.
01:38No, he says that it should be overturned,
01:39not through a court, but through a review.
01:41Tashkent, the Parliament's job is not to legislate.
01:44The court tells the government,
01:46the Parliament every day that,
01:47something is wrong with you,
01:48we want to fix it.
01:49And the Parliament's primary job is to legislate.
01:53If there is a mistake in the law,
01:55it should be corrected,
01:56which this book gives us.
01:58Right?
01:59You are saying that we should not do that.
02:01So, won't the precedent be set?
02:03That a decision has come from the Supreme Court,
02:05the Parliament did not find it right,
02:06so the two-thirds should manage and increase the decision.
02:08Won't this be a dangerous precedent?
02:10Okay, you tell me,
02:11what happens in democracies?
02:13Who has the right to legislate?
02:17So, if we get a number,
02:18the Parliament can do anything?
02:19One minute,
02:20let me answer this too.
02:22One minute,
02:23a very good discussion is going on,
02:25let me stop here.
02:26The Prime Minister is Pakistan,
02:28all-powerful, right?
02:29Or the Prime Minister is all-powerful,
02:31or the President is all-powerful.
02:33Can he alone,
02:35change any word in this book?
02:37No.
02:38Right?
02:39Can he change any law?
02:41Two-thirds are needed, right?
02:43If 51% is needed for the law,
02:44then two-thirds.
02:45Right?
02:46But the judge,
02:48in this book,
02:50puts words in it.
02:53He puts words in it.
02:54Is this right?
02:55Now tell me.
02:56Not literally,
02:57but you are saying that the decision was
02:58equivalent of rewriting the Constitution,
03:00according to you.
03:01Yes, it is.
03:02They have rewritten the Constitution.
03:03Why?
03:04In 63A,
03:05there is no mention of counting of votes.
03:08In the Elections Act,
03:09it is written that
03:10an independent person
03:11will join the political party
03:12within three days.
03:15The Supreme Court has given the direction,
03:16the judge,
03:17to give 15 days.
03:18Then you do one thing,
03:19you say that the law will be
03:21what the judge says.
03:23This big parliament of yours,
03:25probably 336 members,
03:27National Assembly,
03:2896 senators,
03:30one thing,
03:31whenever we talk,
03:33But this is your opinion,
03:35if both don't agree,
03:36then what will you do?
03:37I said,
03:38either they will agree,
03:39or they will agree.
03:40Otherwise?
03:41See,
03:42if two-thirds are not there,
03:43then there can't be an amendment.
03:44It is a very simple thing.
03:45See,
03:46we always follow our opinion.
03:49Everyone agrees that
03:51this paper,
03:52this book,
03:53is Supreme.
03:54In the preamble of this book,
03:56the National Assembly
03:57has written,
03:58wherein the state
04:00shall exercise its powers
04:02and authority
04:03through the chosen
04:04representatives of the people.
04:06Who has to decide?
04:07Of course,
04:08the representatives of the people.
04:09But this
04:10delusion that is created again and again,
04:12But the Supreme Court also says,
04:14Mansoor Ali Shah has quoted,
04:15and many others,
04:16Atharv Mananlal has also,
04:17that the decision that has just come,
04:19which was the last one?
04:20Yes,
04:21the one with 8 members.
04:22No,
04:23the one before that,
04:24in which he said,
04:25it is absolutely right,
04:26the Parliament has the right to legislate.
04:28We are not gatekeepers.
04:29However,
04:30He did this in the Napa case.
04:32Yes,
04:33in the Napa case.
04:35However,
04:36if that legislation
04:37is contradicted by the constitution,
04:38then we will also come.
04:39Tell me,
04:40where is it written in this constitution?
04:41That if the legislation
04:42is contradicted by the constitution,
04:43then the court will come.
04:44Who has to make the constitution?
04:45The Parliament.
04:46The Parliament.
04:47So,
04:48the chosen representatives of the people
04:49of the Parliament will sit,
04:50they will make the constitution.
04:51They will make the constitution
04:52and set the parameters.
04:53What is the basic principle of the constitution?
04:54It is a trichotomy of power.
04:55There is an executive,
04:56there is a legislature,
04:57there is a judiciary.
04:58So,
04:59if the Parliament passes something
05:00that is contradicted by the constitution,
05:01then what will happen?
05:02The court will not do anything?
05:03It can be changed.
05:04But,
05:05One minute,
05:06you can change it,
05:07but
05:08something that is contradicted by the constitution,
05:09for example,
05:10So,
05:11who will decide now?
05:12The Parliament,
05:13see,
05:14the basic thing
05:15that you have to decide is
05:16what are the limits of the Parliament,
05:17what are the limits of the court.
05:18If the Parliament
05:19intervenes in judicial matters
05:20and makes decisions,
05:21is that the right thing?
05:22No.
05:23Is it wrong?
05:24Every institution
05:25should stay within its limits.
05:26Right?
05:27Similarly,
05:28if the court
05:29changes the word of the law
05:30and changes 3 to 15,
05:3115 to 3,
05:32is this right?
05:33No.
05:34That is why I say again and again
05:35that if we want to move forward
05:36as a nation,
05:37we will have to do introspection.
05:38Where I have said
05:39something wrong,
05:40I have to accept it
05:41and move forward
05:42in a reformed way.
05:43And,
05:44if there is another institution,
05:45they also have to think the same.
05:46Fair enough.
05:47Let's move on to the next question.
05:48This is also a related question.
05:49In today's development,
05:50I am saying that
05:51if,
05:52for example,
05:53without going into details,
05:54those special sessions
05:55are given back
05:56to the ruling communities,
05:57then the number game
05:58of Maulana Sahib
05:59will be completed
06:00even without him coming.
06:01So,
06:02can this be passed
06:03in this way
06:04as well?
06:05But,
06:06again,
06:07to the best of my knowledge,
06:08Article 51
06:09is probably
06:10an amendment.
06:11That is not being considered.
06:12That is,
06:13again,
06:14not on the table.
06:15So,
06:16you are telling me
06:17that as we speak,
06:18till now,
06:19the structure
06:20of the parliament
06:21at this time,
06:22if we get the truth
06:23of that,
06:24then we will do it
06:25or not.
06:26Am I right?
06:27Absolutely.
06:28It is not like
06:29that you bring in
06:30the special people
06:31and then get it back.
06:32It is not like
06:33that I bring in
06:344, 5, 6, 8, 10 people
06:35and say that
06:36I am legislating today.
06:37You bring in
06:384, 5, 6, 8, 10 people
06:39who are deprived
06:40of their seats
06:41as a result of that
06:42decision,
06:43get their notification
06:44and then complete
06:45the number and
06:46pass it.
06:47This will not happen.
06:48This is not going to happen.
06:49And,
06:50in any way,
06:51all this work
06:52cannot be done
06:53through any
06:54ordinance,
06:55right?
06:56It cannot be done
06:57by 2-3 people.
06:58No,
06:59no,
07:00wait a minute.
07:01Anything can be done
07:02in this country.
07:03No,
07:04even martial law
07:05can be done
07:06by 2-3 people
07:07who are deprived
07:08of their seats
07:09as a result of that
07:10decision.
07:11This is not
07:12going to happen.
07:13This is not
07:14going to happen.
07:15This is not
07:16going to happen.
07:17This is not
07:18going to happen.
07:19This is not
07:20going to happen.
07:21This is not
07:22going to happen.
07:23This is not
07:24going to happen.
07:25This is not
07:26going to happen.
07:27This is not
07:28going to happen.
07:29This is not
07:30going to happen.
07:31This is not
07:32going to happen.
07:33This is not
07:34going to happen.
07:35This is not
07:36going to happen.
07:37This is not
07:38going to happen.
07:39This is not
07:40going to happen.
07:41This is not
07:42going to happen.
07:43This is not
07:44going to happen.
07:45This is not
07:46going to happen.
07:47This is not
07:48going to happen.
07:49This is not
07:50going to happen.
07:51This is not
07:52going to happen.
07:53This is not
07:54going to happen.
07:55This is not
07:56going to happen.
07:57This is not
07:58going to happen.
07:59This is not
08:00going to happen.
08:01This is not
08:02going to happen.
08:03This is not
08:04going to happen.
08:05This is not
08:06going to happen.
08:07This is not
08:08going to happen.
08:09This is not
08:10going to happen.
08:11This is not
08:12going to happen.
08:13This is not
08:14going to happen.
08:15This is not
08:16going to happen.
08:17This is not
08:18going to happen.
08:19This is not
08:20going to happen.
08:21This is not
08:22going to happen.
08:23This is not
08:24going to happen.
08:25This is not
08:26going to happen.
08:27This is not
08:28going to happen.
08:29This is not
08:30going to happen.
08:31This is not
08:32going to happen.