Irfan Siddiqui press conference on supreme court case of PTI MNA spacial seets and constitution Amendments in national assembly
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00And a dictator wants to validate me, he gets validation and also says that you can amend as much as you want, you have the right to do so.
00:09What is this?
00:11We have seen these courts, the country has paid for it.
00:15Now, for God's sake, you are a legal court, the biggest legal court.
00:20You are working according to the law.
00:23And according to the law, according to the law, according to the country's regulations, the matters will move forward.
00:28What has happened here is that instead of moving forward, the matter has been made so complicated, so complicated,
00:36that it has become very difficult for us to solve any of its puzzles.
00:40Before going into the details, I come to my question, which is in my mind,
00:46and I want this question to be discussed, its answer to be found without any prejudice, without any political discrimination.
00:56The question is that every day we come to know that such and such law of the parliament,
01:03the court has terminated it because it is contrary to any form of the law.
01:18It was declared non-landwide.
01:20And something was found on it that it is contrary to such and such form of the law and is not in accordance with it.
01:29Okay, it has been happening and we keep tolerating it.
01:33This is also the right of the court to explain and look at the laws.
01:37Okay, now when the law is made, there is a long process in it.
01:42Those of you who often do reporting know how a law is made, then how it is vetted,
01:49how the law ministry looks at it, how it goes to the Standing Committee,
01:54how it goes to the two committees, how it is passed.
01:57It is a long process.
01:59If there are 342 or 338 members of the National Assembly,
02:03if there are 100 members of the National Assembly,
02:05then the people who are around 450, they look at it and pass it or reject it.
02:14So I want to put my question to you again.
02:19I want to stress on this and the central point of this press conference is also that
02:25does our law, which is passed by the parliament after such a long process,
02:33one or two or three or four or eight judges say that it is contrary to the law,
02:40we accept it.
02:42We either repeal that law or we amend it.
02:46Today the question has arisen that is it possible in this court
02:52that a small or large bench of the 13 or 14 or 15 or 17 judges can make a mistake or not?
03:03Can the judges of the court, like us, like parliamentarians,
03:08make mistakes like humans or is it a tribe of prophets that cannot make mistakes?
03:17If it is possible,
03:19and we think that this decision has been made more than once,
03:24the constitution has been broken again and again,
03:26and the law of 2017 has been broken again and again,
03:29the election act has been broken.
03:31So if we make a mistake, then the court amends it.
03:36In the name of God.
03:37When the court commits a very big mistake,
03:40and a wrong decision that is directly contrary to the constitution comes forward,
03:46what were its reasons?
03:48What were its reasons?
03:49Was it a view of complete justice?
03:51Was it a view of need?
03:53Was it a view of convenience?
03:54There is no debate on this.
03:55A decision on which the entire nation is present,
03:58now those who say that it is right, it will be wrong,
04:01but it is a decision of the court, we have to accept it.
04:03We accept this principle.
04:05But today it should be decided that when such a decision,
04:09which is contrary to the constitution,
04:11if we do something contrary to the constitution,
04:14then there is a forum, the court corrects it.
04:17If the court does the same thing as we do,
04:19then who will correct it?
04:21This is the question I wanted to ask.
04:23I can give a lot of detail in this.
04:26Look, in this decision,
04:28such things have happened that are inevitable.
04:31The constitution says that in three days,
04:33those people who are elected,
04:35and this is what article 17 of our election act explains,
04:40they have to join a party within three days.
04:43This is the logic.
04:44So that before going to the assembly,
04:46they can correct their Qibla,
04:49and start horse-trading there.
04:51That yes, sometimes I voted for this, sometimes I voted for that.
04:54The constitution gives three days,
04:56the law gives three days,
04:57and says that either you join a party,
05:00or remain independent.
05:01Now, despite the fact that the people who came independent around 1980,
05:05they were conscious people,
05:07they voluntarily joined a party,
05:11which was called the Sunni Unity Council.
05:16Now they went into it.
05:18Now according to the constitution,
05:20they went into such a cage that was closed.
05:23The constitution keeps that cage closed for five years,
05:26does not open it.
05:27It says that you have decided to remain independent,
05:30for the next five years you will be independent.
05:33Now this constitutional condition,
05:36this constitutional system,
05:39you break it.
05:41You open that lock,
05:43open the cage,
05:44which the constitution does not allow,
05:46and tell the prisoners to come out.
05:48They cannot come out.
05:49Legally and constitutionally they cannot come out.
05:51And you not only take those birds out,
05:54you also tell them to fly,
05:56and not to go here,
05:57and not to go there,
05:58and not to go there,
05:59and not to go there,
06:00only to a special asylum,
06:02and go sit in a PTI asylum.
06:04What is this?
06:06What is this constitution?
06:08What is this law,
06:09what is this constitution?
06:10And then when the law says three days,
06:14where did you get fifteen days from?
06:16And the constitution says three days,
06:18these fifteen working days,
06:20which spread and become twenty-five days.
06:22Where did you get this from?
06:24And the constitution says three days,
06:26these fifteen working days,
06:2820-25 days. Where did this power come from? If you have taken this power, then you have
06:35taken it wrong. Then, let's go ahead. Sunni Ijtihad Council goes that we need special
06:41seats near the Election Commission. The Election Commission rejects your request from all four.
06:48You take an appeal and go. You are told that we have a very good court. It has a very soft
06:55court. It will give us a decision. You go to Peshawar High Court, leaving Islamabad High
07:01Court. Five senior judges of Peshawar High Court sit and give the decision of all five
07:08that you cannot get these seats. You come from there, Sunni Ijtihad Council. You go
07:13to the Supreme Court. Now, the decision of the Supreme Court is that Sunni Ijtihad Council
07:19you cannot get these seats. The matter ends. But from here, that view of need breaks. That
07:26view of convenience breaks. And that view of complete justice breaks, which we do not
07:33understand any logic. Under complete justice, we are giving these seats to the party that
07:39neither went to the Speaker that we need these seats, nor went to the Election Commission
07:45that we need these seats, nor went to the High Court that we need these seats, nor went
07:50to the Supreme Court that we need these seats. Till today, I am discussing this with you,
07:55till today, in the Sunni Ijtihad Council, the PTI members who went, none of them said
08:02on any forum that we want to change our party. Under which law, if I belong to PMLN, under
08:10which law can you tell me to leave PMLN and go to People's Party, or go to PTI, or go
08:17to MPM? How can you do this? There are countless miracles in this, in this decision, which
08:25are directly contrary to the constitution. That is why I repeatedly ask this question
08:30and I am raising that when such a situation arises, what should we do? In the past, we
08:36kept seeing a lot. Four Marshallas were appointed, none of them stood up for us. We repeatedly
08:43say that the Marshallas destroyed us. Yes, the Marshallas destroyed us. It is the character
08:48of the Marshallas, it is the character of the dictators to destroy the country. Ten
08:52times more than them is the character of those courts that glorified those dictators. Today,
08:57if the Parliament says that we want to amend the constitution, then it is a disaster.
09:02The dictator wants to validate me, he also gets validation and also says that you can
09:07amend the constitution as much as you want. What is this? We have seen these courts, they
09:14suffer, the country has suffered. Now, for God's sake, you are a constitutional court,
09:19the biggest constitutional court. You are working under the constitution. You are not
09:25independent. The Parliament is also not independent. There is no roof over these two. We have also
09:31taken the oath that we will uphold the constitution. You have also taken the oath that you will
09:35uphold the constitution. How do you uphold the constitution? If we do not uphold the
09:39constitution, then you arrest us. When you do not uphold the constitution, then tell
09:44us where we should go. When there are two ways in front of the Parliament, that what
09:49the constitution says, they should follow it, or if someone says a non-constitutional
09:56constitution, then they should follow it. These two ways they have put in front of us.
10:00And they have created a problem for us that what should we do and where should we go.
10:04And then after that, you can see their way of doing things, they have given a decision.
10:09Two days later, our second appeal went on. A week later, the appeal of the People's
10:14Party went on. It has been two months. It has been more than 60 days. Those appeals
10:19have not been filed yet. And there is a stick that why is it not being implemented? It
10:23is not being implemented.